Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (6) TMI 181

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... A group was restrained from representing the Company. During the subsistence of the said order the letter was issued and therefore the CLB was entitled to pass the said order. Admittedly the said order was passed after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties, but while passing the order no reason has been recorded and it is only for non-recording of reason the same is set-aside - This will however not prevent the Tribunal if so entitled to pass an order after hearing the parties and passing a reasoned order. In fact the order passed is an interim order and after filing of affidavits the application be disposed off in accordance with law. - A.P.O. No. 168 OF 2012 A.P.O.T. No. 189 OF 2009 A.C.O. No. 42 OF 2009 - - - Dated:- 6-7-2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ar of Companies on 25th November, 2008. The Company Law Board was considering an application filed under Regulations 44 and 47 of the Company Law Board Regulations, 1991 and Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. In refusing to treat the application of 2009, as a contempt application the same should have been dismissed and no order passed as any order passed is in aid of the final relief which dealt mainly with wilful, deliberate and contumacious disobedience of order dated 8th May, 2007 and punishment to be levied on basis thereof. No reasons have been assigned as per the requirement of Section 10E(4C) and 5 of the 1956 Act, as giving of reason flows from the principles of natural justice and a quasi-judicial body is required to give reasons unless .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e disposing off C.A. 251 of 2007 filed in C.P. 50 of 2007 seeking dismissal of the petition and vacating the order dated 8.5.2007, the prayer for vacating the order dated 8.5.2007 was rejected but the proceedings before the CLB was stayed. From order dated 17th April, 2009 an appeal under Section 10F of the 1956 Act was filed on 12th May, 2009 and it is only thereafter on 21st May, 2009 that A.P.O.T 189 of 2009 has been filed. Therefore till 17th April, 2009 the appellant acquiesced in the order dated 5th February, 2009. The complaint was lodged on 25th November, 2008 through MKA s advocate and it was thereafter on 23rd December, 2008 that the Registrar of Companies forwarded the same to the respondent. A reply was given on 12.1.2009 and th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the demerger was signed by MKA. Form 21 has also been signed by MKA. Pursuant to the demerger on 13.5.2003 the said demerger was acted upon at the meeting held on 10th June, 2004 and therefore the complaint filed by the advocate of Mahendra Kumar Agarwalla is contrary to the aforesaid. In fact the criminal complaint filed in 2006 is additional evidence of the exit of the MKA Group from the company. No question of law has been raised in this appeal. It has not been argued that on materials disclosed the order could not have been passed. AIR 1983 SC 1272 is not a case dealing with parallel proceeding. In reply counsel for the appellant submits that although relief in terms of prayer (d) was sought but the same has not been granted as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... egulation 47 but the same was treated under Regulation 44 of the 1991 Regulation and order passed on 5.2.2009. An interim order was passed on 8.5.2007 whereby the MKA group was restrained from representing the Company. During the subsistence of the said order the letter was issued and therefore the CLB was entitled to pass the said order. Admittedly the said order was passed after giving an opportunity of hearing to the parties, but while passing the order no reason has been recorded and it is only for non-recording of reason the same is set-aside in view of (1990) 4 SCC 594 and (2010) 3 SCC 732. This will however not prevent the Tribunal if so entitled to pass an order after hearing the parties and passing a reasoned order. In fact the ord .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates