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

2004 Supreme(AP) 969

N.V.RAMANA
RDF Power Projects Ltd. , Hyderabad – Appellant
Versus
M. Muralikrishna – Respondent


N. V. RAMANA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal under section 10-F of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short the Companies Act ) is directed against the order dated 20-4-2004 passed by the Company Law Board, Additional principal Bench, Chennai, in C. A. No. 37 of 2004, refusing to stay the proceedings in C. P. No. 25 of 2003, pending before it, until the conclusion of the suit proceedings in O. S. No. 61 of 2002, pending on the file of the XIII Junior Civil Judge, City Civil court, Hyderabad.

( 2 ) THE facts necessary for disposing of this appeal, may briefly be stated, and they run thus:

( 3 ) APPELLANT No. 1, namely M/s. RDF power Projects Limited (hereinafter referred to as the company ), incorporated by appellant No. 2 and the respondents, for establishment of power generation plant by using municipal solid waste. Appellant no. 2, it appears, was appointed as Managing director of the company vide resolution dated 27-12-1998 for a period of five years. While functioning as such, he states that the respondents who made abortive attempts to divert the funds of the company, were removed as Directors from the Board of the Directors of the company. While so, on the basis of a resolution allegedly pas


























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