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

2025 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 1976

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
HARNAM SINGH THAKUR, UMESH KUMAR SHUKLA, JJ
AMA India Enterprises Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Mr. Rishi Magoo – Respondent
IA(CA) No.35(CH)/2023 | RT CA No. 04/Chd/Pb/2017 | CP No. 89(ND)/2009



Advocates:
For the Applicant : Mr. G. S. Sarin, PCS
For the Respondents: Mr. Ajay Garg, Mr. Mahesh Sharma

Settlement agreements executed between the parties must comply with prior judicial directives regarding share valuation and the process to reduce a company's share capital, ensuring statutory requirements are met.

Headnote:(A) Companies Act, 1956 - Sections 397, 398, CA 1956 - Interlocutory Application under NCLT Rules, 2016 - Petition for oppression and mismanagement - Original Petitioner held 14,03,408 shares; granted exit at fair valuation - Settlement Agreement executed among parties - NCLAT mandated purchase of shares with 9% interest - NCLT dismissed application for reduction of share capital citing lack of express provision for such in prior orders. (Paras 1, 2, 11, 13, 14)

(B) Legal Principles - The Tribunal's powers in cases of oppression and mismanagement include share purchase but must be exercised in line with prior directions for exit and valuation. (Paras 12, 14)

(C) Findings - Settlement amount of Rs. 4,27,26,120/- accepted as full and final payment; prior NCLAT order directed purchase of shares but not reduction of share capital clearly states Bill must be followed. (Paras 11, 13)

(D) Issues - Whether the payment transitions share capital reduction post the deceased’s exit and whether the valuation aligns with the required approvals and documents. (Paras 6, 11, 12) (E) Ratio Decidendi - The NCLT determined no reduction of share capital order was made in previous decisions; each act must comply with statutory and procedural mandates irrespective of agreed settlements without clear prior directives. (Paras 13, 14) (F)

Result: Interlocutory Application dismissed; parties may pursue further applications if necessary. (Para 14)

Table of Content
1. introduction of case details. (Para 1 , 2)
2. details of applications and settlement. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9)
3. analysis of legal provisions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
4. final decision on the interlocutory application. (Para 14)

ORDER

This Interlocutory Application (hereinafter referred to as the “IA”) has been filed, vide Diary No. 3501 dated 25.10.2023, under Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the “NCLT Rules”) by AMA India Enterprises Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the “Applicant Company”) through its authorised representative against the Mr. Rishi Magoo (hereinafter referred to as the “Respondent No.1”), Mrs. Asha Magoo (hereinafter referred to as the “Respondent No.2”) and Mrs. Neelima Malhotra (hereinafter referred to as the “Respondent No.3”) (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Respondents”) in respect to the Company Applications (hereinafter referred to as the “ CA ”), bearing C.A. No.80/2022 and 81/2022, which were filed by the Applicant Company in relation to the order dated 21.01.2019 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench (hereinafter referred to as the "NCLT" or “This Tribunal”), further modified by the Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the "NCLAT") vide order dated 11.02.2020, directing the Applicant Company to purchase the shares held by Lt. Mr. Ravinder Kumar Magoo (hereinafter referred to as the "Original Petitioner) at the determined value with 9% interest per annum. The Applicants have prayed inter alia for the following reliefs:

(a) take on record Settlement Agreement dated 20.10.2023 annexed with the IA as Annexure A-1;

(b) pass an order disposing of Applications, bearing C.A. No. 80/2022 and 81/2022, in terms of Orders dated 11.02.2020 and 04.05.2023 passed by the Ld. NCLAT and in terms of the Settlement Agreement dated 20.10.2023, recording payment of Rs.4,27,26,120/- made by the Applicant Company to Respondent No.1 against cancellation and reduction of the 14,03,408 shares of Rs.10/- each held in name of Respondent No. 1 in the Company.

(c) pass any other order and/ or direction that this Tribunal may deem fit in the interest of justice.

FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts, as stated by the Applicants in the IA, are as below:

(i) Late Mr. Ravinder Magoo, Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the “Original Petitioner”), as on 11.02.2020, held 14,03,408 (Fourteen Lakh Three Thousand Four Hundred and Eight) shares of Rs.10/- each in the Applicant Company (hereinafter referred to as the “Subject Shares”)

(ii) The Original Petitioner filed a filed a Petition under Sections 397 , 398, 401 and 402 to the Companies Act, 1956 , bearing Company Petition No. 89(ND)/2009 before the Company Law Board, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “CLB”) against the Applicant Company and its director alleging oppression and mismanagement in the Applicant Company.

(iii) The Ld. CLB disposed of the said Petition, vide Order dated 02.01.2015 and pursuant to the said order, the Ld. CLB directed to provide exit to the Original Petitioner from the Applicant Company on a fair valuation as on 31.03.2014.

(iv) Pursuant to the order of the Ld. CLB, the Appointed Valuer submitted the Valuation Report on 16.04.2015. The Applicant Company filed an application, bearing CA No. 133/C-II/2015, challenging the said Valuation Report before the Ld. CLB, which was later transferred to NCLT consequent to the coming in effect of the Companies Act, 2013 . The Hon’ble NCLT disposed of the application of the Company by order dated 21.01.2019, upholding the Valuation Report given by the Appointed Valuer dated 12.10.2015, but altering part of the valuation price.

(v) The Original Petitioner as well as the Applicant Company challenged the order of the NCLT dated 21.01.2019 and filed two separate Appeals, bearing Company Appeal (AT) Nos. 95/2020 and 102/2020, before the Hon’ble NCLAT, which we

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 Back to top