CL : Where petition alleging oppression and mismanagement was filed to create pressure on respondents to part with some money from them, petition was to be rejected
■■■
[2014] 48 taxmann.com 391 (CLB - New Delhi)
COMPANY LAW BOARD, NEW DELHI BENCH
Bharat Bhushan Agarwal
v.
Jai Mata Foods Ltd.
B.S.V. PRAKASH KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
C.P. NO. 52 OF 2008
MARCH 28, 2014
Section 241, read with sections 242, 58 and 59 of the Companies Act, 2013/Section 397, read with sections 398 and 111A of the Companies Act, 1956 - Oppression and mismanagement - It appeared that petitioners had set up litigation to pressurise respondents to part with some money - Further, petitioners had no stake in R-1 company at relevant time - Whether they could not invoke jurisdiction under sections 397 and 398 - Held, yes - Whether since, in fact, no prejudice was caused to petitioners, their petition was to be rejected - Held, yes [Paras 38 & 39]
■■■
[2014] 48 taxmann.com 391 (CLB - New Delhi)
COMPANY LAW BOARD, NEW DELHI BENCH
Bharat Bhushan Agarwal
v.
Jai Mata Foods Ltd.
B.S.V. PRAKASH KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
C.P. NO. 52 OF 2008
MARCH 28, 2014
Section 241, read with sections 242, 58 and 59 of the Companies Act, 2013/Section 397, read with sections 398 and 111A of the Companies Act, 1956 - Oppression and mismanagement - It appeared that petitioners had set up litigation to pressurise respondents to part with some money - Further, petitioners had no stake in R-1 company at relevant time - Whether they could not invoke jurisdiction under sections 397 and 398 - Held, yes - Whether since, in fact, no prejudice was caused to petitioners, their petition was to be rejected - Held, yes [Paras 38 & 39]
No comments:
Post a Comment