2006 (12) TMI 225 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues:
Interlocutory order permitting inspection of documents by former directors of the company.

Analysis:
The appeal challenges an interlocutory order allowing former directors of the company to inspect and obtain copies of specific documents. The appellant argues that the order should not have been granted without demonstrating the relevance of the documents to the company petition. Additionally, the appellant contends that since the respondents are no longer directors, they should not be entitled to such inspection and copies. On the other hand, the respondents argue that the inspection is limited to the period when they were directors and does not prejudice the appellants. They also assert that an appeal against an interlocutory order is not maintainable.

The court examined the order in question and found no error in directing the appellants to provide inspection of relevant documents to the respondents and allowing them to obtain xerox copies at their own cost. The court noted that during the period in question, the respondents were directors and had access to company affairs, justifying their right to inspect the records and obtain copies. The court emphasized that the issue of relevancy does not arise in this scenario, especially considering the winding-up petition filed by the respondents which raised various concerns. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal, with no order as to costs.

As a result of the dismissal of the appeal, the appellants agreed to provide the requested documents within two weeks. In response, the respondents indicated they would not pursue the contempt application filed before the company judge, indicating a resolution of the matter.