1. In the Company Petition filed by Mr. Johnny Mathew ("the petitioner") under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 ("the Act") alleging acts of oppression and mismanagement in the affairs of M/s. Duroflex Limited ("the Company"), the Company questioned the maintainability of the Company Petition by means of the present application made under section 402 of the Act on various grounds, as reiterated by Shri B.C. Thiruvengadam, learned Counsel appearing for the Company in the course of his arguments, as under :—

The acts of oppression and mismanagement set out in the Company Petition have been already urged before the CLB by Mr. Tommy Mathew, brother of the petitioner in CP No. 68 of 2000.

u Mr. Tommy Mathew, having failed before the CLB, instigated the petitioner to file the present Company Petition seeking his reliefs on the basis of the grounds made by Mr. Tommy Mathew in C.P. No. 68 of 2000. Most of the grounds urged by Mr. Tommy Mathew are the basis for the present Company Petition. The Company Petition No. 68 of 2000 was disposed of by the CLB on merits culminating in a final order dated 12-9-2000, with consent of the parties concerned. As the proceeding under sec