9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 273X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Board, rejecting the application that had been filed by the 2nd Company petitioner before the Board, who figures as the 2nd appellant in this appeal seeking, for impleading the 1.5th respondent herein, as an additional respondent to the company petition presented under Sections 397 and 398 r/w Sections 111, 402 and 403 of the Companies Act, 1956, (for short 'the Act') at an advanced stage of the company petition. 2. The company petition presented under Sections 397 and 398 of the Act was on the premise that the 1st company-petitioner having a share holding to the extent of 13% per cent of the capital of the company and the 2nd company-petitioner aspiring for equity in the company to the extent of 10% of the equity shares on the premis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondents, rejected the application for impleadment as per the order dated 30.9.2011. 7. It is aggrieved by this order of the Company Law Board, the present appeal. 8. Notice had been issued in this appeal to the respondents on 2.1.2012. 9. It appears in the meanwhile, one of the respondent viz., R-13 had expired and it is submitted at the bar, by Sri Tiruvengadarn, learned counsel for the appellants, that steps are being taken in the main petition now pending before the Company Law Board. 10. However, Mr. Vishwanath, learned counsel appearing for the legal heirs of the deceased respondent No. 13 and who are proposed to be added in this appeal seeks a short accommodation to look into the matter and file a response if necessary. 11. Havi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned counsel for all the respondents. However, Sri Vishwanath, learned counsel appearing for the legal heirs of the 13th respondent supports the stand of the appellants and submits that there is transfer of funds between the 1st respondent-company and the 15th respondent-company, which is sought to be represented in the proceedings between the Company Law Board, so also submits Mr. Rayappa Hadagali, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 11 and 12. 14. It obviously appears that the appellants have some support even amongst the existing respondents before the Company Law Board and the board found some justification to issue notice to the proposed respondents and we find that the proposed respondent is reluctant to join the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
