TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 682X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained that even though at the time of incorporation, he had subscribed to 2,000 shares, the same have not been issued to the petitioner. There are further allegations of oppression and mismanagement in the petition. The respondents have raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner has not satisfied the requirements of Section 399 of the Act on the ground that he has not paid the consideration for the shares that he had agreed to subscribe in the memorandum. 3. Shri Sarkar, senior advocate for the respondents submitted : Even though a subscriber to the memorandum is a member in terms of Section 41 of the Act, yet, till he pays the consideration for the shares, he cannot be treated as a member for the purposes of Section 399 of the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpany would be ₹ 50 lakhs and therefore in the first board meeting itself, the petitioner agreed to contribute ₹ 10 lakhs for the shares provided the respondents contributed ₹ 40 lakhs. However, the respondents were not agreeable to this suggestion. Even though, the petitioner was willing to pay the consideration for 10,000 shares, the respondents have refused to accept the same and now they are claiming that since the petitioner has not paid the consideration for the shares, he cannot maintain this petition. Such a stand of the respondents itself is a grave act of oppression against the petitioner. Even now, the petitioner is willing to contribute towards shares if the company agrees to accept the same. Further, when the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on for the shares subscribed, which, obviously the petitioner has not done. His contention is that he offered to pay ₹ 10 lakhs provided the respondents also paid ₹ 40 lakhs and since the respondents had not agreed to the same, he has not paid any money. Presently, his complaint is that the company is not accepting any payment towards the consideration for the shares. My attention has not been drawn to any document to show that the petitioner has offered to pay the consideration or he had tendered the same, to decide whether non-acceptance of the consideration for the shares could be an act of oppression as contended by Shri Chaudhary. While a stand could be taken that in respect of the additional shares of 8,000 no calls have b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
