Sanjib Banerjee, J.

The question of law raised is so trivial that the appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 does not call for a judgment; a two-page order dictated in five minutes would have sufficed. It is the other aspect of the matter that needs to be recognised and highlighted, particularly in the light of the backbreaking numbers of pending cases of every description in courts and tribunals.

2. The appeal is at the behest of the company in respect whereof a petition under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 has been launched in 2009 before the Company Law Board, complaining of oppression and mismanagement by the management of such company. The order appealed against is one of May 23, 2014 on the application by the company and its management for vacating an ex-parte ad interim order of August 20, 2009. The appellants maintain that since the names of the petitioners before the CLB did not figure in the company's register of members, the petitioners lacked the qualification under Section 399 of the said Act of 1956 to launch any proceedings complaining of oppression or mismanagement in the affairs of the company. The appellants insist that notwit