TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 787X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ances, the only option available to this Court is to set aside the impugned order and to relegate the parties for reconsideration of the application on its own merits in accordance with law. Besides, the appellants contend that the grievance of the appellants that the information has been pressed by the petitioners so as to misuse the same as they have been set up by the competitor builders, has been lightly brushed aside without examining the same on its own merits. Even this direction will have to be reconsidered by the Board and record a clear opinion as to the justification for issuing such direction against the appellant-company. The appropriate course is to set aside the impugned decision and instead relegate the parties before the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petition. 3. The question of law that arises in this appeal and on which question alone the impugned decision deserves to be reversed, amongst other, is : whether the interim relief granted by the Board during the pendency of the main petition without recording any tangible reason and more so objectively analysing the objection raised by the opposite party, can stand the test of judicial scrutiny and be said to be an order suffering from the vice of material irregularity ? 4. Insofar as the first direction is concerned, except issuing such direction no reason whatsoever has been recorded by the Company Law Board, which necessitated issuance of such direction. Besides this criticism, counsel appearing for the appellants has also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the petitioner in the interim prayer. The grievance of the appellants before this Court is that even with regard to this direction no reason whatsoever is recorded by the Board to justify the said direction. According to the appellants, the information sought by the petitioner is in no way covered within the scope of section 163 of the Companies Act, 1956. For that reason the petitioner may not be entitled for the said relief at all. Besides, the appellants contend that the grievance of the appellants that the information has been pressed by the petitioners so as to misuse the same as they have been set up by the competitor builders, has been lightly brushed aside without examining the same on its own merits. Even this direction will hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
