Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MANISH PITALE
Jyoti C. Raheja – Appellant
Versus
Aasia Properties Development Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MANISH PITALE, J.
These two appeals have been filed under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956, challenging the order dated 19.09.2006 passed by the Company Law Board, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'CLB'), taking exception to different parts of the same order. While the appellants in Appeal No.6 of 2006 are aggrieved by the direction contained in the impugned order of the CLB, declaring that the original petitioner before CLB i.e. Aasia Properties Development Limited (respondent No.1) in the said appeal was entitled to nominate one director on the Board of the Company - Juhu Beach Resorts Limited, the appellant in Appeal No.11 of 2006 i.e. the aforementioned Aasia Properties Development Limited, now known as Hinduja Realty Ventures Ltd., is aggrieved by the findings rendered by the CLB on the aspect of manipulations of records of the Company relevant for the date of acquisition of 1/3rd shares of the Company by the said petitioner, as also denial of prayer for representation on the Board of the Company. The appellants in both the appeals have made rival submissions on analysis of Section 397 read with Section 402 of the Companies Act, 1956 by the
The court ruled that both oppression and just and equitable grounds must be established for the CLB to exercise jurisdiction under the Companies Act, emphasizing strict interpretation of Articles of ....
The judgement establishes that shareholders holding not less than one-tenth of a company have the right to apply under the Companies Act for remedies regarding oppression and mismanagement.
The court established that the NCLT must conduct a thorough examination of evidence in cases involving rectification of the Register of Members under the Companies Act, 2013.
The Court ruled that the application under the Companies Act was maintainable despite previous findings, emphasizing proper compliance with ownership criteria for governance disputes.
(1) Parliament always recognised possibility of a deemed public company again reverting back to status of a private company.(2) Position in law that a contract of personal services cannot be enforced....
The Tribunal ruled that contempt proceedings must be based on enforceable orders, noting that previously cancelled shares cannot be reinstated, while recognizing the significance of corporate governa....
Point Of Law: Decision/Order Of Company Law Board - Under Section 10F an appeal to the High Court againt an order of the Company Law Board entertained only on a question of law
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
