TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 912X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... file the present petition. He submitted that the petitioner and his family members, viz., Mr. Ramesh Samarthmal Seth, Smt. Babli Samarthmal Seth, Miss Manju Samarthmal Seth, Miss Vidya Seth, Smt. Lalika Ramesh Seth and Mr. Ronak Ramesh Seth are shareholders holding 20 per cent. paid-up share capital of the company and hence entitled to file the present petition under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956, against it for committing gross mismanagement and oppression in running the day-to-day affairs of the company and thereby causing huge financial loss to the petitioner and his family members who are shareholders of the company. Mr. Pravin Mehta, the respondent is a managing director of the company and indulged in mismanagement an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 000 per year from the premises rented out to the Vijaya Bank and further there is income of Rs. 3,00,000 per month from the canteen business of the company which amounts to Rs. 36,00,000 per year. He submitted that the petitioner asked for the following information in the notice dated June 23, 2008, which was sent to the respondent : (a) Weekly income generated out of the main theatre business of the company since 1980 on year to year basis till date, (b) Income generated from the business of the canteen per month since 1980 on year to year basis till date daily break up of income and expenditure, (c) Income generated from the rented premises to the bank per month since date of allotment to the bank on year to year basis, (d)Total un-disbur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te since 1980 and bills paid for the electricity, water and other sundry expenses incurred by the company and all the payments made by cash in respect of any expenditure incurred by the company, and (m) Projected income and expenditure statement of the current financial year of the company. 3. Shri V. B. Yadav, learned counsel further submitted that the managing director of the company has failed to give details of the aforesaid requisition and hence it amounts to suppression of the financial record of the company for which the petitioner is entitled and in view thereof the petitioner is preferring the present petition for a direction to the respondent to submit all the necessary details and financial records before this Bench. The respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of sub-section (1), any one or more of them having obtained the consent in writing of the rest, may make the application on behalf and for the benefit of all of them." 7. Thus the above provisions of law clearly emphasise the requisite qualification to apply under sections 397 and 398 of the Act. The petitioner is a shareholder holding 140 shares out of issued and subscribed paid-up capital of 1,900 shares which constitutes 7.37 per cent. Hence the petition is not maintainable. However, the petitioner states that he and his family members put together hold 20 per cent. of the paid-up share capital. Though the petitioner mentioned the names of his family members he has not filed any letters of consent from them in writing, hence he has not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on or before March 31, 1998, but the said firm failed to repay the said principal amount on the due date. By letters dated November 17, 2004 and November 24, 2004, addressed by the petitioner to the manager of the company, the petitioner purported to raise various false, frivolous and vexatious allegations and insinuations against the said company and its directors and its affairs which to the very knowledge of the petitioner were totally false, bogus and baseless. 10. It is further submitted that Ramesh S. Seth is a present director of the company and is the son of the petitioner and family member of the partners of the said firm. He confirmed that all the accounts and payments of the company have been received by him and his father, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he company on account of repayment of the principal amount and accrued interest thereon. In the circumstances the company had lost and was deprived of security of the said premises and was in fact cheated and duped. The petitioner has defrauded the very company in which he was a founder director and in which company he and his family, members had shares. In the circumstances, the company was left with no other recourse but to file a complaint under the provisions of sections 420, 465, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. In view of the above, the petitioner who has indulged and played fraud upon the company usurping and mismanaging the security and assets of the company and flittering away the funds, has approached this Bench with un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
