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

1995 Supreme(All) 675

SUDHIR NARAIN, LAKSHMANA RAO
PRAKASH TIMBERS PVT. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
SUSHMA SHINGLA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
MURLIDHAR, SUMAN AGRAWAL

SUDHIR NARAIN, J.


( 1 ) A preliminary objection has been raised in this appeal by the respondents first set that the Special Appeal against the judgment of the learned single Judge, deciding the first appeal under S. 10-F of the Companies Act, 1956, against the order dated 15-9-1995, passed by the Company Law Board, Principal Bench, New Delhi, was not maintainable under Chapter VIII, Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules (hereinafter referred to as rules ).

( 2 ) THE brief facts are that Prakash Timbers Private Limited, appellant No. 1 was incorporated as a company in the year 1961. It decided to bring into existence another subsidiary company and, consequently, Hridaya Narain Yogendra Prakash Properties Private Limited was incorporated as wholly owned subsidiary of Prakash Timbers Private Limited. In August 1991, Smt. Sushma Shingla and Smt. Sandhya Sharan, respondents 1 and 2 requested that a meeting of the Board of Directors be called to discuss the mismanagement in the company but no such meeting was called. In the third week of March, 1992, they received a letter from the Assistant Registrar of the Companies that it had come to their notice that they had sold their shares



































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