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

2018 Supreme(Mad) 2219

T.RAJA
Bhagavan Das Dhananjaya Das – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. P.H. Aravind Pandian, Mr. C.V. Shailandhran
For the Respondents: Mr. G. Rajagopalan, Dr. V. Venkatesan, Mr. T.V. Krishnamachari

ORDER :

The petitioners in this bunch of writ petitions have challenged the respective impugned orders dated 8.9.2017, 1.11.2017 etc., passed by the Registrar of Companies, Tamil Nadu, Chennai, the second respondent herein, uploaded in the website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi, the first respondent herein disqualifying them to hold the office of Directorship of the companies under Section 164(2)(a) of the Companies Act 2013, which came into effect from 1.4.2014, to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and devoid of merits with a consequential direction to the respondents herein to permit the petitioners to get reappointed as Director(s) of any company or appointed as Director(s) in any other company without any hindrance.

2. Since the raised in all the writ petitions is common, for convenience, the facts as pleaded in W.P. No. 25455 of 2017 are alone referred to in this order.

3. Mr. P.H. Aravind Pandian, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P. No. 25455 of 2017, leading the arguments, assailing the impugned order as arbitrary, unreasonable an




























































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