V.GOPALA GOWDA, AMITAVA ROY
PURNIMA MANTHENA – Appellant
Versus
RENUKA DATLA – Respondent
Judgment :
Amitava Roy, J.
Leave granted.
2. The steeled stand off encased in the decision impugned, projects the members of a family, daughters against their mother in particular, in a combative formation in their bid to wrest the reins of a company, Biological E. Limited (for short, hereinafter to be referred to as “the company”) engaged in the business of pharmaceutical products and vaccines. The differences that had surfaced soon after the demise of Dr. Vijay Kumar Datla, the predecessor-in-interest of the contending family members, who at his death, was the Managing Director of the company, have grown in acrimonious content with time, stoked by the intervening events accompanied by a host of litigation. The present appeals stem from the judgment and order dated 15.4.2015 rendered by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad, for the State of Telangana and State of Andhra Pradesh, in Company Appeal No. 17 of 2014 preferred by the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 herein, under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short hereinafter to be referred to as “the Act”) assailing the order dated 6.8.2014 passed by the Company Law Board, Chennai Bench (for short, hereinafter to be referred
V.S. Krishnan v. Westfort Hi-tech Hospital Ltd.
Wander Ltd. v. Antox India P. Ltd.
Election Commission of India v. Dr. Subramaniam Swamy
The Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay v. The Scindia Steam Navigation Co. Ltd.
Lalit Kumr Modi v. Board of Control For Cricket in India
Gokaraju Rangaraju v. State of A.P.
State of Punjab v. Krishan Niwas
Raj Kumar Shivhare v. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement
Waman Shriniwas Kini v. Ratilal Bhagwandas & Co.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.