9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Application to bring legal heirs on record dismissed 2. Challenge against dismissal of application Analysis: The petitioner employed Mohan Lal and filed a complaint under section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956, alleging wrongful possession of a residential quarter. Mohan Lal passed away during the proceedings, and the petitioner's application to include his legal heirs was rejected by the ACMM. Subsequently, the petitioner's revision petition was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge. The petitioner contested both decisions seeking permission to bring on record the legal heirs of Mohan Lal. The courts below justified their decisions by stating that Mohan Lal's death created a new cause of action for the petitioner to pursue legal action against the deceased employee's legal heirs. However, the High Court disagreed, emphasizing that section 630 of the Companies Act considers the offense as a continuing one, encompassing not only the employee but also their legal heirs and representatives. Referring to a Supreme Court case, the High Court highlighted that legal heirs continuing possession of the property obtained through the employee are equally liable under section 630. The High Court clarified that the death of the employee does not lead to the abatement of the prosecution, as the liability to return the wrongfully held property extends to the legal heirs. Therefore, the legal heirs must be held accountable to the company. Consequently, the High Court allowed the petition, overturning the orders of the lower courts. The ACMM was directed to revive the proceedings, serve notice to the legal heirs of Mohan Lal, and proceed with the case in accordance with the law. The judgment underscores the importance of holding legal heirs accountable for actions of deceased employees under section 630 of the Companies Act.
|
