9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1058X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 19.09.2006 the Company Law Board had directed that status quo, with regard to the shareholding and the assets of the company, as of that date be maintained. 2. Indisputably, the principal asset of the company is a plot of land allotted by the DDA. It is stated that a firm under the name and style of Seth fashions was constituted by the five sons of Shri Late K.C. Seth in 1992. The said brothers participated and were successful in an auction of a plot of land conducted in 1992. Subsequently, the appellant company was incorporated on 26.10.1993 where all the five Seth brothers were directors and shareholders. At the instance of the said Seth brothers the DDA transferred the entitlement to the said plot being plot no. 17 in District Ce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the present appeal has been filed by the rival group who are attempting to usurp the control of the appellant company and thus the present appeal ought to be rejected at the threshold. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 6. It is apparent from the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the respondent, that interest of the company is required to be protected. The only question of law that arises in the present appeal is whether the Company Law Board erred in ignoring the interest of the appellant company. It is settled law that the interests of the company are paramount in proceedings under Section 397/398 of the Companies Act, 1956. It is also apparent from the pleadi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld also not make any claims against the company for funds infused by them for the aforesaid purposes in the event, their claims as to share holding in the appellant company are not accepted by the Company Law Board. 7. I find that the rights of the respondent will not be prejudiced in any manner if this offer made by the learned counsel for the appellant is accepted. Accordingly, the interim order of status quo dated 19.09.2006 passed by the Company Law Board is varied to the limited extent as indicated below. The appellant company is entitled to apply to the DDA for restoration of the lease as well as apply for revalidation of the sanctioned building plans and carry out construction in accordance therewith. The funds required for these s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
