9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 674X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y has issued a postal ballot notice solely with the object of amending the objects clause of the memorandum of association ('MoA') of the company and with the intention of commencing certain entirely new business, to its shareholders on or about 19th May, 2011 which was received by the applicants on or after 24th May, 2011 (though the said notice is dated 28th April, 2011 but the same was allegedly deliberately posted late that is on or after 19th May, 2011 to the shareholders). The postal ballot notice requires the company's shareholders/members (including R-11 to R-35 holders of 62.9 per cent) voting power through the estate of Priyamvada Devi Birla ('PDB') now R-2 (HVL) to send the filled postal ballot form to the appointed scrutiniser by 18th June, 2011. It has been contended that the R-2 (Shri Harsh Vardhan Lodha) by illegally usurping the voting rights of the estate of PDB is now seeking to authorise the company to carry out money market operations including dealing in securities, instruments, etc., which amendment would be ultra vires the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act') besides being done with an ulterior motive, the amendment of the object clause of a mainly cement manufact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its manufacturing, trading and selling operations in cement. The company has several plants in Rajasthan, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh where its business of manufacturing cement is carried on. The cement business yields nearly 93 per cent of the total revenue of the company and the minuscule remainder is generated from certain miscellaneous activities and particularly its business operations in jute and power generation. Other divisions, namely, the Auto Trim Division and Vinoleum Divisions made no contributions or made very insignificant contributions as the existing management of the company has brought these divisions to the stage of virtual closure. The company is the flagship company of the industrial conglomerate consolidated by the late M P Birla ('MPB'), who died on 30th July, 1990. During his lifetime MPB controlled his business empire essentially through majority shareholding which he held in his own name and in the name of his wife, the late Smt. PDB. Such majority shareholdings were owned particularly in two companies, namely, the East India Investment Co. (P.) (Ltd.) ('EIICPL') R-24 and GWCPL (R-17) the personal shares held by PDB in R-24, EIICPL (74.9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 2008 filed by Shri H V Lodha and other heirs of Shri R S Lodha, inter alia, for bringing them on record and to be allowed to continue with TS No.6 of 2004 in place of Shri R S Lodha, since deceased has by judgment and order dated 5th February, 2010 been allowed and the suit for grant of probate has been amended and converted into a suit for grant of letter of administration. Such proceeding being TS No.6 of 2004 is pending. It may be noted in this regard that in any event, under regulation 3(g) of SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997, acquisition of shares by way of transmission on succession or inheritance would be exempt from the applicability of regulations 10, 11 and 12 of the said Code." The above note relates to the entirety of the 62.9 per cent shares held by PDB at the time of her death through the chain of the respondent Nos. 11 to 35 which is now allegedly said to be under the illicit and illegal control of the R-2. 3. It was pointed out that R-2, namely, Shri Harsh Vardhan Lodha ('HVL') and his stooges and henchmen and associates presently illegally in control of the company do not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the said 62.9 per cent shareholdings through the various companies and charitable institutions in the said group. It was pointed out that after the death of RSL on 3rd October, 2008 his younger son, namely, theR-2 purportedly assumed and illegally took control of the entire M P Birla group of companies ; and particularly the control of the voting rights in respect of the said 62.9 per cent shareholding forming part, even according to him of the estate of the late PDB, despite the fact that in the proceedings filed in the Hon'ble High Court Calcutta in its order dated 27th August, 2610 in GA No.3731 of 2008, seeking the relief to authorise/empower him to carry out and discharge the acts and functions relating to the estate of Late PDB as administrator pendente lite ('APL') thereof. The hon'ble High Court in testamentary proceedings ultimately determined that "it does not entitle him to be appointed as APL after all he is claiming right as legatee so he has interest". HVL's attempt to represent the estate of PDB was rejected outrightly by the hon'ble High Court. It was pointed out that he is unfit to represent the estate of PDB and neither competent nor deserving of such a posit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tution or reconstitution of Board of directors of the companies in which the deceased had shareholdings wherever possible under law. They shall submit accounts of receipts and outgoing, arising out of and in connection with the property of the said deceased in every three months in the court. All the persons concerned who are (is) in custody of the original share scripts and other documents relating to bank account are in custody of the original share scripts and other documents relating to bank account are directed to handover the same to the joint administrators. The joint administrator will act ordinarily jointly, but in case of non-availability of any of the joint administrators remaining administrators or administrator will act however ratification of the court is to be obtained later at the earliest." 6. It was argued that R-2 has no locus standi to be in control of the 62.9 per cent shares or voting rights attached thereto forming part of the estate of PDB, he has no power, authority or competence to control the voting rights in respect of the said 62.9 per cent shareholdings standing the names of the respondent Nos. 1 to 35, the appointment of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ithin the concept of "some business which under existing circumstances may conveniently or advantageously be combined with the business of the company". It was pointed out that the purported amendments propose material changes and the proposed new businesses obviously do not come under the existing clauses of the existing memorandum and have nothing to do with the businesses contemplated under the existing clauses. The nature of the proposed new businesses is such that neither on the ground of convenience nor otherwise can they be combined with the existing cement business of the company. It was reiterated that the proposed amendments are not only unnecessary and illogical but are also diametrically contrary to and violative of the specific statutory requirements contained in the said section and the sub-clauses prescribed thereunder. The proposed amendments, if introduced, will convert the company and make it for all practical purposes a company dealing in speculative businesses as well as other fiscal kinds of dealings more appropriately related to financial institutions such as banks and non-banking finance companies and other like trades or vocations all of which have nothing t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tirely outside the original objects of the company. 11. It was alleged that the explanatory statement annexed to the purported postal notice is in general terms without specifying any details or the specific provisions of section 17 of the Act or without specifying any reasons, justification for the same. 12. It was pointed out that the expression "to commence" used in the purported postal ballot notice is tricky, false and to mislead the shareholders, in fact, such fiscal business activities and operations were illegally commenced by and in the name of the company on and from the year 2008-09 at the instance and direction of the R-2 without being authorised to do so by its memorandum, the R-1-company illegally registered itself as an associate member of the Collateralised Borrowing and Lending Obligations ('CBLO') Segment of the Clearing Corporation of India (Ltd.) ('COL'), the Members in CBLO segment are predominantly banks, financial institutions, PSUs, mutual funds, insurance companies and the like and very, few private sector companies (other than non-banking financial companies and the categories mentioned earlier) are "asso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o enable the R-2 and his family to earn huge remuneration and not as a process or in pursuance of or for the purposes of the company's existing cement and jute business. The applicants have pointed out that all the financial transactions conducted by and in the name of the company in the money markets on and from the year 2008-09 have been routed through the agency of a company named Lodha Capital Markets Ltd., a family company of the R-2 and is entirely owned and controlled by R-2 and his brother and his other family members. Lodha Capital Markets Ltd. also has a wholly owned subsidiary named and described as PLC Securities (P.) Ltd. There is no record available to evidence how the two Lodha companies which are the alter ego of the R-2 and his family came to be engaged by the company. Through the instrumentality and agency of these two companies, all the financial dealings purportedly done in the company from the year 2008-09 onwards in the financial and money markets of India have been conducted and such business has yielded huge remuneration for these two entities in the shape of brokerage and commission on each and every transaction carried out in the company's name. By this me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss and not that for hypothecation circumstances. The words "to commence" in the notice are tricky and misleading. It is stated that they are going to do this business in the future. Shareholders are told the company is not doing it so far. But the balance sheets will show that they are doing it. It was pointed out that they have done this in some aspect or other in the past since 2008. Then the shareholders are told that none of directors is concerned or interested in the proposed resolutions whereas the companies through which the business is done are the family companies of R-2. 17. Reading section 17 of the Act my attention was drawn to the restrictions. The business proposed should be combined with the existing business of the company, not under hypothecated circumstances. There is a statutory infraction here. The amendment has to come within the ambit of clauses (a), (b), (c), (d) of sub-section (1) of section 17. The alteration must be in compliance with section 17, the alteration cannot be otherwise. New business may be started, that business could be under existing circumstances. But in the present case they are taking the company completely out in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... controlling interest is still with the estate of late PDB.... and that is the reason they have raised the issue of Takeover Code". The applicants' case is the Board has been completely changed. It is an admitted fact that earlier MPB was in control, after his death his wife (PDB) controlled, after her death RSL controlled 62.9 per cent voting rights of these shareholders and they say it has to be decided by the High Court. Both parties admit that RSL was controlling 62.9 per cent of the voting rights through (R-11 to R-35). After the death of RSL, his son HVL is in control but they have denied it in their counter affidavits. It was pointed out that RSL applied for probate, there are some other Wills also, after the death of RSL, his son (HVL-R-2) made an application. He did not make a prayer to exercise voting rights, because he got similar voting rights. Whereas R-11 to R-35 have denied on affidavits that R-2 controls 62.9 per cent voting rights. 19. It was argued that the Board of R-1-company decides to go for change of the object clause of memorandum of association. Can R-2 do what he likes is the question posed. In probate case APL have been appointed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he allegations made in the main CP have been adjudicated upon. The importance of pleadings was emphasised. There has to be an end to adding on new pleadings. CA No.302 cannot be entertained by the CLB as the subject-matter of the CA is not in the CP, and because CLB lacks jurisdiction in the matter. 21. It was argued by the respondents to CA No.302/2011 that the subject-matter of the CA is not found in the CP No. 1/2010, without amending the CP it cannot be considered, there is no prayer to amend the CP. In any case even the grounds given in CA are without any merit. It was argued that the applicants' counsel has cited old law and old provisions of section 17. Reading the provisions of section 17 it was pointed out that it is no longer necessary to come to either court or CLB to obtain the sanction of any judicial authority for change of object clause of memorandum of association. The case law cited pertains to the unchanged section when sanction was required to be taken from either court or the CLB. It was argued that if the shareholders have any grievance against change in the object clause, they may go to civil court and not the CLB. Judgment reported a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which were cited are about what were the existing business and what was the change. Some of the cases are of 1905/1906. At that point of time the scope of business by company was quite different. To say that a new business cannot be started is an antiquated view. Today assuming the company has got some money to invest, the price of shares is going up, it is not right time to invest, right time to invest is when the price of shares are falling, then they rise and company makes a profit, in this context investment will be made. There may be no investment opportunity in India today but opportunity will arise in future. In India market is well developed, well regulated. When funds are available, investment opportunities are available in India the company wants to utilise it, the company gets a better return. The company is 100 years old. Whenever there is a surplus fund it can be invested for better return. The company has declared dividends 60 per cent last year. Next year it will be higher. 27. The counsel for the respondents argued that these clauses are only elucidatory in nature, there is already the following object which permits the company to utilise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r not the proposed new objects can be conveniently and advantageously combined with the existing business of the company; it is for the shareholders to decide whether or not such proposed objects can be incorporated with the existing objects of the company ; such exercise of statutory voting rights of shareholders to decide whether or not to amend the object clause of the company ought not to be curtailed or restricted at the behest of the petitioners, who have filed the present proceeding with the object of harming the company. 29. It was argued that the applicants do not even want the shareholders to exercise their right to decide as to whether or not to change the object clause, they want to prevent them from exercising their right. This cannot be permitted. Views of shareholders are very important. 30. It was contended that the proposed alterations shall have a positive effect on the existing business of the company. It was argued that the proposed resolutions are not repugnant to any statute or void by virtue of section 9 of the Act and that the new business under the existing circumstances may be conveniently and advantageou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also members of CCIL. It was stated that the company has not overdraft facilities aggregating to Rs.200 crore from its bankers for CBLO purposes. Borrowing from CBLO is one of the alternative sources of financing which is more beneficial than obtaining loans from banks and financial institutions. 36. It was stated that there is no misrepresentation in the ballot notice or that any fraudulent statement is contained therein or that the shareholders have been misled or that any false belief has been created or that any prohibited business has been done in the past. It was stated that the company is acting within the limits of its authority as per memorandum and articles of association in borrowing funds through CBLO. Further, it was contended that the proposed business of the company would not expose the company to criminal prosecution or to any penalty, under any law or under criminal law or under the Act. It was pointed out that the applicants are not entitled to have particulars of the dealings or transactions which are conducted by the company or that any dealings or transaction of the company is wrongful or illegal. It was stated that the company does no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of India, Barclays, etc. It was denied that all financial dealings in the company from 2008-09, in the financial or money numbers of India, have been conducted in the name of Lodha Capital Markets Ltd. or PLC Securities (P.) Ltd. or that these two entities have earned huge remuneration in the shape of brokerage or commission from the company,. 41. It was contended that appointment of any internal auditor or special officer is not necessary or expedient. Any. transaction in the money market is not stigmatised or invalid or ultra vires, no dealing has been done beyond the objects of the company, specified in the memorandum. Any business done in the name of the company is not illegal or detrimental to the interest of the company or its shareholders or to public interest. It was contended that in any event, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief. The reliefs prayed for are beyond the scope of CP No.1/10, the proposal to introduce amendments in the object clause of the company do not have any underlying motive or any ulterior motive or part of a scheme or a subterfuge. Further, it was contended that the amendments would not be ultra vires the company la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that what he had read on the earlier occasion was the correct provisions and not old section. My attention was drawn to clauses (a), (b) and (c) of sub-section (1) of section 17 to contend that clauses (a), (b), (c) do not apply in the present case, only clause which the respondent may attempt to attract is clause (d), clauses (e), (f), (g) being also not applicable in the present case. Clause (d) was read again and it was contended that the applicants had emphasised the word under existing circumstances, there must be existing business of the company and the proposal must be to combine the new business whatever new business (the counsel added the word 'new business' section does not say so). The respondents must show under which clause the company is claiming to come. Further, it was emphasised that there is no evidence. Not one evidence to show that they come under clauses (a)/(b)/(c)/(d). The section earlier required confirmation. Not now. It was emphasised that there must be a compliance of what is laid down by section 17 and the company has no right to go beyond that in any manner whatsoever. Their case, if any can be under clause (d) all others are out of question. There is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is violation of statutory provision by the respondents against whom a petition alleging oppression and mismanagement is already pending. The applicants have come for relief against oppression attracting section 402 as well. It is the CLB which is to regulate the affairs of the company. Further incident has happened, it is a subsequent event which has occurred during the pendency of proceedings, which can always be taken up by the court. The CLB has jurisdiction in this matter. The CLB is the appropriate forum where the minority shareholders have come to the CLB in a case of oppression and mismanagement in the affairs of a listed company having public interest. The procedure permits seeking of urgent relief, it can be sought on emergency circumstances associated with the existing CP No. 1 of 2010. The matter for decision of amendment, the CLB can take up, if necessary CLB can direct it to be part of the CP No. 1/10, there is no new cause of action. It is a subsequent event which is in continuation of the allegation of oppression and mismanagement. The respondents, in the parameter of section 17 of the Act are not entitled to change the object clause. Shareholders' view cannot overri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nest or bona fide or lawful manner. There is no question of prejudice to the answering respondents in the present matter. 56. It was emphasised that Lodha Capital Markets Ltd. is company of the R-2 and PLC Securities (P.) Ltd. is also the alter ego of the R-2 or his family. The object of the proposed amendments to the memorandum of association of the company is clearly to defraud the company and to benefit the R-2. 57. It was pointed out that the present application has been filed with the object of preventing the R-2 and his stooges and henchmen from converting the company to a trader in securities and commodities in violation of the provision of the Act. There is no question of interference with the internal management of Birla Corporation Ltd. The issue of the purported postal ballot notice is entirely ultra vires and beyond the jurisdiction of the objects of the company. Any restraining order with regard to the postal ballot notice cannot be conceived to be interference with the internal management of the company and the contentions in this behalf are totally misconceived. It was contended that it is wrong to argue that the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r change the local area of its operations ; (d) to carry on some business which under existing circumstances may conveniently or advantageously be combined with the business of the company ; (e) to restrict or abandon any of the objects specified in the memorandum ; (f) to sell or dispose of the whole, or any part, of the undertaking, or of any of the undertakings, of the company ; or (g) to amalgamate with any other company or body of persons. By the Amendment Act of 1996 the structure of section 17 was changed. For any alteration of the object clause all that is necessary is a special resolution. Sanction of the CLB has been dispensed with. Companies are free to alter their objects without CLB's sanction, the alteration has to be confined within the limits set by sub-section ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sub-section (1) of section 17, as has also been judicially held in a number of cases. The case law cited by the applicants gives sufficient illustrations showing how the courts view as to what constitutes combining of some business(es) with the business of the company in existing circumstances conveniently or advantageously. No case has been made out under clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 17. The case law cited by the respondents does not take their case any further. The respondents have heavily relied on the case of Bhutoria Brothers (P.) Ltd. (supra). The applicants have also relied on this case. This case gives exposition of law with regard to clause (d). This is the law as on date. This case strengthen the applicants case and in no way provides for an escape route for the respondents. 60. I am not looking at the provisions of section 17(1) and its compliance for the purpose of giving sanction or confirming the change in the object clause. The requirement of sanction by the CLB has been dispensed with way back in the year 1996. I am looking at the provisions and their compliance to ascertain whether or not the proposed amendment is in the intere ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regard my attention has been drawn to judicial proceedings at para 135 annexed to the pleadings in the CP No.1/10. Para 135 reads as under : "Mr. Mitra submitted that allegations made that investment of the funds of Birla Corporation Ltd. through PLC Securities Ltd. - a company controlled by RSL in mutual funds. He pointed out that such investments in mutual funds through PLC Securities Ltd. has been continuing since prior to the demise of PDB at least since 1999. Birlas themselves have annexed accounts statements of such mutual funds, invested through PLC Securities Ltd. during the lifetime of PDB." The shareholders have been kept in the dark about such transactions said to be taken in future whereas the applicants have succeeded in making out a prima facie case that the new business is "not to commence" as stated in the postal ballot notice, it has already commenced, though illegally since 2008, the internal auditors have been silent about it, but the amendment sought is a remedial action to avoid criminal proceedings already initiated, the statement in the postal ballot notice using the words "to c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the company and its present management as well as all the presently employed officers, employees and other personnel have no experience whatsoever. The company will be left to venture in markets that are notoriously volatile and speculative, and characterised by unstable and irregular trading conditions with a group of unqualified employees led by the R-2 without any experience or expertise whatsoever to deal in such erratic commodities. HVL (R-2) is a chartered accountant, he has neither any qualification nor any experience to take the company and its funds into such potentially dangerous trades, even in the mercantile world he is an amateur and inexperienced, he has taken over the charge of the company since 2008 after the demise of RSL, his projection to take the company into financial businesses which require years of experience to achieve even minimal levels of competence is very dangerous for the health of the company, the reserves created over a long period of time as well as the current funds are likely to be depleted deplorably. 71. The petitioners have stated that the R-2 is certain for his own benefit and interest, to illegally and unauthorised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 75. Such business has not been disclosed by the internal and statutory auditor of the company, hence, the applicants' prayer for appointment of internal statutory auditor investigation in certain cases are necessary even to regulate the future conduct of the company for providing against recurrence of abuse of power by the majority. 76. It is listed company. The interest of the company as well as the stakeholders will be gravely prejudiced if this special resolution is carried through, which in all likelihood will be carried through with 62.9 per cent votes in the respondents control and command. 77. I was requested to look into the financial statements as contained in the final accounts to which my attention was drawn during the course of arguments. The respondents contended that they have surplus funds (Rs. 33,927.47 lakh as on 31st March, 2010 and Rs. 3,71,106.43 lakh as on 31st March, 2011) for dealing in money market whereas the applicants pointed out at p. 32 of the same final accounts that where are the surplus funds, the company has, in fact, long-term borrowings amounting to Rs. 77,063.90 lakh. Surplus or no surplus fund ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is in respect of a subsequent event in continuation of oppression, the principle of res judicata because of earlier orders, does not apply. CLB's jurisdiction is not ousted. Under section 402 of the Act CLB is vested with wide powers, which are without prejudice to the generality of the powers of the CLB for an order under section 397 or 398 of the Act. The powers under section 402 besides the specified power as given in clauses (b) to (f) are for the regulation of the conduct of the company's affairs even in future [as provided under clause (g)] and for any other matter for which in the opinion of the CLB it is just and equitable that provision should be made [as provided under clause (g) of section 402]. 78. The grievances of the applicants fall squarely in the affairs of the company. Interference by the CLB is called for where the affairs of the company are being conducted in a manner prejudicial to the interest of the general public or in a manner oppressive to any member(s) and shareholders of the company. The Apex Court has held in the case of Cosmo Steels (P) Ltd. v. Jairam Das Gupta [1978] 48 Comp. Cas. 312 that the scheme of sections 397, 398 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings allow either party to alter or amend his pleadings for the purpose of determining the real questions in controversy between the parties, in such manner and on such terms as may be just and necessary. Nevertheless, no application for amendment shall be allowed after the trial has commenced unless the court comes to the conclusion that in spite of due diligence, the party could not have raised the matter before the commencement of trial (order 6, rule 17). The prayer for amendment of pleadings must be construed without causing serious injustice or irreparable loss to the other side and without substituting a new cause of action in the place of original or without altering the subject-matter in controversy between the parties or setting up a new or alternative case to the prejudice of any right acquired by any party. 82. There may not be any straightjacket formula for allowing or disallowing an amendment of the pleadings. If the granting of an amendment achieves the cause of justice and avoids further litigation, it should be allowed. The power of amendment should be exercised on judicious evolution of the facts and circumstances, in which the ame ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hould be made. Objects and purpose of sections 397, 398, 402 and 408 of the Act is two-fold - to set right the wrongs and take remedial action to prevent occurrence of wrongs in future. Thus, both preventive and curative action can be taken by the CLB to regulate the conduct of the company's affairs in future and to bring to an end the matters complained of. 85. In view of the foregoing, the applicants having succeeded in making out a prima facie case for granting of interim reliefs, granting of which in my opinion, in the facts and circumstances of this case shall not cause any prejudice to the respondents, in fact, not granting of interim reliefs sought would cause irreparable loss and damage to the instant public listed company, the substratum itself would go, the company would land up in the money market and get lost, the prayers sought are urgent in nature, require immediate remedial action before it is too late to salvage the situation. The balance of convenience being in favour of the applicants their contentions remaining uncontroverted, to do substantial justice between the parties, the following reliefs are hereby granted to remedy the situation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounts, through the R-2's family companies, the prima facie case having been made out, the allegations made have not been controverted, the firm, namely, Ernst & Young are hereby appointed as Investigating Auditors for investigating into such dealings during the years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 to ascertain the profits made through such dealings by the R-1-company and the Lodha Capital Markets Ltd., PLC Securities (P.) Ltd. and others through whom such business was done. Investigative audit be completed within three months of receipt of this order. R-1-company shall pay the audit fee for investigative audit as per the prescribed rules and procedures (as per men hours). On completion of the requisite audit, the investigating auditors shall present their report to the CLB, Principal Bench, New Delhi as well as to the R-1-company. VII. In view of the applicants having succeeded in making out a prima facie case for granting interim injunction in aid of the main prayers in CP No. 1 of 2010, in the facts and circumstances of this case, the applicants' prayer as contained in para 67 at p. 38 of the CA No.302/2011 seeking leave to add, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
