Back
2005 Supreme(SC) 1627
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.N. VARIAVA, H.K. SEMA, JJ.
National Investors Forum - Petitioner
Versus
Golden Forests (I) Ltd. - Respondent
IA Nos. 7-11 in T.C. (Civil) No. 68 of 2003
Decided On : 20-01-2005
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajiv Dutta, Ms. Shikha Ray, Mr. S.K. Sabharwal
For the Respondent-GFIL: Mr. Swaraj Kaushal, Mr. Sanjeev K. Pabbi, Ms. Naresh Bakshi
For the Committee : Ms. Suruchii Aggarwal, Mr. Ashim Agarwal
For the SEBI : Mr. Bhargava V. Desai, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Mr. Pradeep Kumar Malik
Transparency and disclosure of company information, restraint on dealing with assets, and extension of date for receiving claims from creditors/depositors are essential legal principles established in the judgment.
Headnote:
Disclosure of Company Information - The court ordered the companies to disclose their shareholders, directors, capital, properties, bank accounts, nature of business, and assets, and restrained them from dealing with their assets. The court also directed the disclosure of any associated or subsidiary companies and extended the date for receiving claims from creditors/depositors. The court appreciated the offer of cooperation from a senior counsel and directed the supply of information regarding all assets of the group.
Fact of the Case:
The court ordered the disclosure of various company information and restrained the companies from dealing with their assets. It also extended the date for receiving claims from creditors/depositors.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the companies were required to disclose extensive information about their shareholders, directors, capital, properties, bank accounts, nature of business, and assets. It also appreciated the offer of cooperation from a senior counsel and directed the supply of information regarding all assets of the group. The court also accepted an apology and dismissed a withdrawn application.
Issues: Disclosure of company information, restraint on dealing with assets, extension of date for receiving claims, and withdrawal of application.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of transparency and disclosure of company information, as well as the need to prevent the companies from dealing with their assets. It also highlighted the extension of the date for receiving claims from creditors/depositors and the acceptance of an apology and withdrawal of an application.
Final Decision: The court ordered the companies to disclose extensive information about their shareholders, directors, capital, properties, bank accounts, nature of business, and assets, and restrained them from dealing with their assets. It also directed the disclosure of any associated or subsidiary companies and extended the date for receiving claims from creditors/depositors. The court appreciated the offer of cooperation from a senior counsel and directed the supply of information regarding all assets of the group. The court also accepted an apology and dismissed a withdrawn application.
ORDER :
These Companies to disclose who their shareholdres were when these Companies were incorporated and who are the share holders at present. They also to disclose who were the Directors when these Companies were incorporated and who are the Directors at present. They to further disclose with what capital these Companies were incorporated, what properties were held by them on incorporation, what properties are since acquired and from what funds. They to disclose all bank accounts and/or deposits and/or investments, if any, made by them. The Companies to disclose the nature of the business carried on by them. These Companies to disclose all their assets and also whether they have dealt with their assets and if so, to give details of such dealings including transfer of assets and/or dealings between these Company/Companies and/or with Golden Forests (I) Limited.
2. Each of the Company, its agents and its directors are restrained from alienating, encumbering, parting with possession or dispossessing of in any manner any of its assets.
3. Copies of the applications must be served on SEBI and the Committee.
4. At this stage, prayer is being made on behalf of the Directors that a longer time may be given as in all these Companies the persons in control are in jail. It is stated that they are same persons who have been sent to jail, pursuant to the complaints filed by the investors of Golden Forests (I) Limited. It is also stated that these persons are in control of all these Companies.
5. Four weeks’ time is granted to file the affidavit. Adjourned for five weeks.
IA No. 5 in T.C. (Civil) No. 68 of 2003
ORDER :
6. Golden Forests (I) Limited to disclose whether apart from the Companies mentioned at page 64 of I.A., there are any other Companies or firms who are also associates or subsidiaries. They to also disclose whether any of the Companies mentioned at page 64 have subsidiary or associated Companies or firms.
7. The Committee to issue fresh advertisements calling for claims from creditors/depositors. The advertisements to be in local languages in each State in a paper widely circulated in that State. The Application to state that the date for receipt of application is extended by three months from today.
8. Mr. Swaraj Kaushal, learned senior counsel appearing for Mr. R.K. Syall states that his client is willing to co-operate and give all information regarding all assets of the group. The offer is appreciated and he is directed either through himself or through his counsel to supply the information in writing to the Committee as expeditiously as possible.
IA No. 3 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 188 of 2004
IA No. in T.C. (Civil) No. 1 of 2004
ORDER :
9. It is pointed out that in this unregistered I.A. in T.C. (Civil) 1 of 2004 (which is not on Board today), following allegations have been made:-
"Almost in every hearing the poor investors/depositors/creditors are attending the hearing and seen the plight of their counsel and the treatment accorded to niece-cum-counsel of the Chairman of the committee and are getting nervous day by day thinking that whether the Committee was appointed for the benefit of them or the Chairman and his cronies, who were hand in gloves with the said family the owners of G.F.I.L. till the other day."
10. Mr. Somnath Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicants tenders unconditional apology and states that the said paragraph may be treated as expunged from the Application. He applies that he be permitted to withdraw this I.A. Apology accepted. I.A. is dismissed as withdrawn.
