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

2012 Supreme(Del) 877

VALMIKI J.MEHTA
SATISH CHANDRA SANWALKA – Appellant
Versus
TINPLATE DEALERS ASSOCIATION – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. B.K. Sood, Advocate.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J.

1. This case is on the Regular Board of this Court since 19.3.2012. No one appears for the respondents although it is 3.20 P.M. I have therefore heard the learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record. I am consequently proceeding to dispose of the appeal.

2. The challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal (RFA) filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned judgment of the trial Court dated 4.4.2005 rejecting the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC on the ground that disputes which were subject matter of the suit under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act?) had to be decided by the Company Law Board by virtue of Section 111 of the Act.

3. The facts of the case are that the plaintiffs filed the subject suit for declaration and mandatory injunction on the pleading that the shareholding of defendant Nos.3 and 6 to 9 of the defendant No.1 was of Redeemable Preference Shares issued in the year 1957 for a term of 10 years redeemable in the year 1967; that the defendant No.1-company issued a notice dated 12.10.1996 for holding of an Extraordinary General Meeting on 9.11.1996 for passing of a r














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