ABDUL HADI J.

These two appeals are directed against the order dated April 26, 1983, in C. P. No. 18 of 1979. While O. S. A. No. 61 of 1983 has been preferred by the sixth respondent in C. P. No. 18 of 1979, O. S. A. No. 39 of 1984 is at the instance of respondents Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 therein. The petitioners in C. P. No. 18 of 1979 figure as respondents Nos. 6 and 7 in O. S. A. No. 61 of 1983 and as respondents Nos. 1 and 2 in O. S. A. No. 39 of 1984. In the course of this judgment, the parties will be referred to according to their array in the said company petition. The petitioners filed C. P. No. 18 of 1979 under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), alleging oppression and mismanagement and praying for a declaration that respondents Nos. 2, 4 and 5 (appellants Nos. 2 to 4 in O. S. No. 39 of 1984) in C. P. No. 18 of 1979 are not shareholders or directors of the first respondent company, that the second respondent is not the managing director thereof and that the purported transfer of the two buses, MDE 5902 and MDH 2209, belonging to the company with their respective route permits to the sixth respondent (appellant in