Back
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
Lumax Ancillary Ltd. A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act, 1956 Having Its Registered Office At: B-86, Mayapuri Industrial Area New Delhi.
Mr. Dhanesh Kumar Jain S/o Sh. Late S. C. Jain R/o Farm No. 23, Silver Oak Marg, Ghirtoni, Delhi. – Appellant
Versus
Securities And Exchange Board of India Ltd. 5th Floor, Bank of Baroda Building 16 Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001 – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J. (Oral)--This petition assails the impugned notice dated 09.05.2018, and a subsequent notice dated 19.05.2018 (Annexure-P1 Colly') issued by respondent Nos.2 and 3 to the extent that it includes the name of the petitioners as Promoter of Lumax Automotive Systems Limited. The petitioners have also prayed for the relief to direct respondents No.2 and 3 to remove the name of the petitioners from the "Promoter Group" of Lumax Automotive Systems Limited and reclassify the petitioners as "public group category".
2. The petitioners have taken various grounds to challenge the impugned action of the respondents, however, during the pendency of the instant writ petition, respondent No.3 while presenting a brief synopsis, has pointed out that the petitioner-Lumax Automotive Systems Limited was compulsorily delisted w.e.f. 11.05.2018. It has also been pointed out that at the relevant time, the status of the company, as reflected on the website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) was "Active" and was not showing as "Liquidated/Under Liquidation", therefore, the fair value for the company was computed by an independent valuer appointed in terms of the
The central legal point established in the judgment is the incorrect application of Regulation 24 of Delisting Regulations, 2009 and the importance of ensuring the correctness of legal actions based ....
The court established that procedural compliance is essential in regulatory actions, and failure to follow mandated notice requirements invalidates such actions.
The statutory provisions governing the field provide for a transparent mechanism of delisting the securities, adequate participation and/ or representation of public shareholders in the process of de....
Prior show cause notice is mandatory before delisting a vendor; failure to comply invalidates the decision and is contrary to principles of natural justice.
The ruling clarifies that freezing a promoter's demat account without involvement in the company's management violates constitutional rights and natural justice, reaffirming the necessity of procedur....
Striking off a company's name while oppression proceedings are pending contravenes legal principles and judicial authority.
The restoration of a struck-off company's name relates back to the date of striking off, validating subsequent actions such as notices issued under tax laws.
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
