Back
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Vinay Goel, Judicial Member
Preetha Radhakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
C. K Vijayan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of oppression and mismanagement allegations. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 10 , 16) |
| 2. respondents deny mismanagement, blame applicant. (Para 8 , 9 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. applicant's rejoinder refutes respondents' claims. (Para 15 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. court observes company affairs mismanaged, non-compliance. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. constitute consultative committee for guidance. (Para 27 , 28) |
| 6. appoint special officer with powers under section 242. (Para 29 , 30) |
| 7. ia allowed, main petition unaffected. (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
O R D E R
1. The present application has been filed under Rule 11 of the NCLT, Rules, 2016, seeking the following reliefs: -
(i) Appoint a Special Officer to manage and regulate the day to day affairs of the 4th Respondent Company.
(ii) direct Respondents 1 to 3 to hand over the possession and administration of the Hotel by name "VENTURAA to the Special Officer and refrain from interfering with the affairs of the Hotel and its operations.
(iii) direct Respondents 1 to 3 to hand over custody of the following to the Special Officer forthwith
a. cashbook
b. Ledger
c. Bank Ledger
d. Register of Fixed Assets and Invent
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
