2019 Supreme(All) 838

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SURYA PRAKASH KESARWANI, J.
Nirbhay Kapoor - Appellant
Versus
Kamero Technosys Ltd And Another - Respondent
First Appeal No. 427 of 2019
Decided on : 01-07-2019

Headnote:

Companies Act, 2013 – Section 430, 242, 166, 151 and 152 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order VII – Rule 11 – Section 96 – Both counsel for parties jointly submit pure question of law as to maintainability of suit involved without calling for records and paper book – Whether under facts and circumstances, suit filed by plaintiff-appellant was not maintainable under Section 9 of Code,1908 being barred by provisions of Section 430 of Act, 2013 – Held, On perusal of plaint plaintiff-appellant has set up case that he and defendant-respondent and their family members were directors in six companies and arose some dispute between him and other Directors relating to conduct of affairs of Company and in that event two guests, intervened and an agreement entered on calling of meeting of Directors but defendant-respondent not complied with conditions of aforesaid minutes of the meeting – It has been mentioned in paragraphs 5 to 16 of plaint that in terms of Minutes of Meeting plaintiff-appellant and his family members resigned from Directorship but defendant-respondents sold disputed property and not complied with terms of Minutes of Meeting – Cause of action arose when some persons came to plaintiff-appellant with regard to purchase by them Plot and requested him to sign sale deed – Thereupon plaintiff-appellant contacted defendant-respondent no.2 and demanded money in terms of Minutes of Meeting which defendant-respondent no.2 refused – Question framed answered in affirmative by holding that under facts and circumstances of case suit filed by plaintiff-appellant not maintainable under Section 9 of Code as it was barred by provisions of Section 430 of Act 2013 – Appeal dismissed. (Paras: 24 to 27)

Facts of the case:

Both counsel for parties jointly submit pure question of law as to maintainability of suit involved without calling for records and paper book – Whether under facts and circumstances, suit filed by plaintiff-appellant was not maintainable under Section 9 of Code,1908 being barred by provisions of Section 430 of Act, 2013.

Finding of the court:

On perusal of plaint plaintiff-appellant has set up case that he and defendant-respondent and their family members were directors in six companies and arose some dispute between him and other Directors relating to conduct of affairs of Company and in that event two guests, intervened and an agreement entered on calling of meeting of Directors but defendant-respondent not complied with conditions of aforesaid minutes of the meeting – It has been mentioned in paragraphs 5 to 16 of plaint that in terms of Minutes of Meeting plaintiff-appellant and his family members resigned from Directorship but defendant-respondents sold disputed property and not complied with terms of Minutes of Meeting – Cause of action arose when some persons came to plaintiff-appellant with regard to purchase by them Plot and requested him to sign sale deed – Thereupon plaintiff-appellant contacted defendant-respondent no.2 and demanded money in terms of Minutes of Meeting which defendant-respondent no.2 refused – Thus, cause of action disclosed in plaint clearly indicates complaint of plaintiff-appellant with respect to property of defendant-respondent-Company and conduct of its affairs suit was clearly barred by Provisions of Section 430 of Act – Question framed answered in affirmative by holding that under facts and circumstances of case suit filed by plaintiff-appellant not maintainable under Section 9 of Code as it was barred by provisions of Section 430 of Act 2013.

Result: Appeal dismissed.