SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(SC) 109

K.T.THOMAS, R.P.SETHI
J. K. (Bombay) – Appellant
Versus
Bharti Matha Mishra – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Sethi, J.-Leave granted.

2. Whether the family members of an employee or an ex-employee of a company can be proceeded with in a criminal court, convicted and sentenced for the commission of offence under Section 630 of the Companies Act? (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") is the question of law to be determined by us in this appeal. Relying upon the judgment of this Court in Abhilash Vinodkumar Jain (Smt.) v. Cox & Kings (India) Ltd. & Ors.1 it has been argued on behalf of the company that the expression "officer or employee" appearing in Section 630 of the Act would include all his family members.

3. The admitted facts of the case are that one Mata Harsh Mishra, who is the husband of respondent No.1 and father of respondent No. 2, joined the employment of the appellant- company as Trainee Supervisor in its plant. He was allotted Flat No. 8 in Anil Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., and possession delivered to him for the purpose of his residence during the course of employment while he was in the service of the company. It was made clear to the said employee that he was to remain in possession of the premises only during his employment with the company and had to vaca






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top