TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 1049X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shareholder namely viz. Mohamed Ibrahim Faizal holding 1 (one) equity share have consented by words to file this Petition cannot be taken as a consent to file a Petition under Section 241(1) of the Companies Act. Therefore, the Company Petition filed by the petitioners is liable to be dismissed as not maintainable. Petition dismissed. - TCP/116/KOB/2019 - - - Dated:- 10-6-2022 - Hon ble Mr. Ashok Kumar Borah, Member (Judicial) And Hon ble Mr. Anil Kumar. B, Member (Technical) For the Appellant : A.D. Shajan, Advocate For the Respondents : Sindhu Santhalingam, S. Sharan, Muhammed Ansary, Sohail Mohammed Ansary, Lakshmi Sreedhar and Keerthana S. Ragh, Advocates ORDER Per : Ashok Kumar Borah, Member (J) This Compan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Board taken out his powers as Managing Director and appointed Shri Vetrivel Anutham as the Managing Director of the company with effect from 05.06.2017. 5. It is further stated that the 2nd Respondent had not co-operated with the finalization of accounts of the 1st Respondent Company for the financial year 2016-2017 during which he was the Managing Director and not delivered the minutes books and statutory registers of the 1st Respondent Company. Due to the above action of the 2nd Respondent of withholding the minutes books and statutory registers of the 1st Respondent Company, which caused the 1st Respondent Company in filing its annual return (Form MGT-7) for the financial year 2016-2017 in time. It is stated that the 2nd Respondent w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7/01/2017. It was decided by the Directors that the 2nd Respondent will own the car and that he shall look into the tax implications for using the car for his personal use. Thereafter the 1st Respondent Company transferred an amount of Rs. 5,65,000/- to the 2nd respondent for the purchase of the car. The car was provided to the 2nd respondent only for official use. But, until 11th March 2013, the 2nd respondent was claiming mileage expenses for the private car. Subsequently, he started claiming all direct car expenses such as diesel, repairs, treating the car as a 'Company' car. Since the 2nd respondent was removed as Managing Director on 5th June 2017 and as a Director of the Company on 4th July 2017, the 2nd respondent should have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the delay in filing of E-Form MGT - 7 is due to the mismanagement of the Petitioner and 1st Respondent and not because of the 2nd Respondent. When Mr. Vetrivel Anutham was appointed as Director as on 11.01.2017, the 2nd Respondent was asked to come to Kochi to hand over available details of the Company to Mr. John Vadassery, Practising Company Secretary and the 2nd Respondent dutifully met him and handed over available details. 13. It is also stated that since then the removal of the Managing Director on 16.09.2017 no attempt has been made by the 1st Respondent Company to pay salary and other statutory dues to the 2nd Respondent. Salary from the month of January 2017 to 16th September 2017 is not settled along with other statutory dues ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion is maintainable, the Petitioner in para 6.10 of the Company Petition stated as under:- All the shareholders expect Respondent No. 2 and one other shareholder namely viz. Mohamed Ibrahim Faizal holding 1 (one) equity share have consented by words to file this Petition. The details of shareholders of the Respondent No. 1 Company is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure-C. 16. No consent from any of the shareholders has been submitted by the Petitioner to take cognizance as to the eligibility for the Petitioner to file a petition under Sections 241(1). 17. The consent in writing is explained in the matter of Kuttanad Rubber Co. Ltd. v. K.C. Ittiyavirah, reported in AIR 1994 Ker 1314, wherein it is stated that:- Before a memb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
