9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HAHIT AND RAVI MALIMATH, JJ Murari for the Appellant. JUDGMENT V.G. Sabhahit, J. - This appeal is filed by the petitioner in Company Application No. 107/2011 on the file of the Company Law Board, Chennai Bench, being aggrieved by the order dated 11-5-2011 wherein the Company Law Board has declined to grant the interim prayer sought for by the appellant herein. However, has observed that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plication for the above said reliefs. 3. The resolution Agenda for removing the appellant from the Board of Directors was placed before the Company Law Board. The Company Law Board having narrated the facts of the case, found that having regard to the material on record, notice of requisite time has been issued and felt that this is not a fit case for granting interim order as sought for. However ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner-appellant herein. 6. We have given careful consideration to the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and scrutinized the material on record. The appeal is filed against an interim order passed by the Company Law Board. The prayer that was sought for in the application and considered by the Company Law Board in the impugned order was to restrain holding of the meet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e decision of the petition. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant submits that appellant has to file rejoinder in the main petition and he would file the same within one week. If the rejoinder is filed as submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant within one week, the Company Law Board shall dispose of the main petition within two months from the date of receipt of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
