Shri Auduth Modu Timblo vs Shri Dilip Modu Timblo

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - BENCH AT GOA
C. V. BHADANG, J
Shri Auduth Modu Timblo – Appellant
Versus
Shri Dilip Modu Timblo – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri J.E. Coelho Pereira, Shri S. Karpe, Ms. D. Lotlikar
For the Respondents: Shri Joseph Kodianthara, Shri E. Correia, Shri J. Sequeira

Table of Content
1. background context of the company and shareholders' disputes is critical. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
2. discussion on whether the limitation is a preliminary issue involves interpretations of clb's procedural discretion. (Para 17 , 18)
3. decision entails examination over the applicability of limitation act in company petitions. (Para 19 , 20)
4. addressing knowledge of share ownership is essential for limitation considerations. (Para 22 , 30)
5. final ruling emphasizes the procedural integrity in addressing both limitation and merits. (Para 44)

JUDGMENT :

All these Company Appeals involve common and connected questions of law and fact. As such, they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. These four appeals represent two sets of cross appeals, one each by, Auduth Timblo (AT) being Company Appeal Nos. 1/2013 and 2/2013 and the other by his brother, Dilip Timblo (DT) being Company Appeal Nos. 7/2013 and 8/2013. It would be sufficient to set out the facts in Company Appeal No. 2/2013.

Background Facts:

3. The brief facts are that Sociedade de Fomento Industrial Private Limited (SFIPL), (Company, for short) is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (the Act, fo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - BENCH AT GOAC. V. BHADANG, JShri Auduth Modu Timblo – AppellantVersusShri Dilip Modu Timblo – Respondent

BOMBAY HIGH COURT - BENCH AT GOA
C. V. BHADANG, J
Shri Auduth Modu Timblo – Appellant
Versus
Shri Dilip Modu Timblo – Respondent