M. Chockalingam, J.

When these appeals were taken up for enquiry, the learned Senior Counsel Mr.T.K.Seshadri appearing for the first respondent raised a question as to the maintainability of the appeals.

2. On the point of maintainability, both the Counsel put forth their respective submissions.

.3. According to the learned Senior Counsel for the first respondent/applicant, these appeals have been brought forth by the second respondent in Company Applications 1625 to 1628 of 2006 in C.P.No.387 of 2003 whereby a direction to the respondents 3 to 8 to file the statement of affairs with the Official Liquidator forthwith and also a direction to the Official Liquidator to examine the conduct of the affairs of the first respondent company by respondents 3 to 8 and submit a report before the Court on the acts of misfeasance and breach of trust committed by the respondents 3 to 8 and to take cognizance of the offence committed under Sec.454 (5) of the Companies Act, 1956, on the basis of the prosecution of non filing of statement of affairs by the respondents 3 to 8 and also to grant interim injunction restraining the second respondent from acting through its directors, employ