2008 (12) TMI 676 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act 1977 was not maintainable against an ad interim order of injunction.? Held that - It is not a fit case wherein we should exercise our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. The appeals are dismissed with costs. Counsel fee assessed at 50, 000/- in each case.

Issues Involved:
1. Holding of Annual General Meetings (AGMs)
2. Injunctions and Contempt Proceedings
3. Transfer of Shares
4. Validity of Elections of Directors
5. Maintainability of Appeals under Contempt of Courts Act

Detailed Analysis:

1. Holding of Annual General Meetings (AGMs):
The Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd. faced issues in holding its AGMs from 1996 to 2003. The Company Law Board directed the AGMs for these years to be held, leading to the election of some Directors. The 82nd AGM was scheduled for 24th December 2004, but a suit (C.S. No.981 of 2004) was filed by the appellant, leading to contempt proceedings. The Supreme Court remitted the matter to the High Court for fresh consideration, directing the learned Single Judge to consider the application for an injunction on merits and to dispose of the suit expeditiously.

2. Injunctions and Contempt Proceedings:
The High Court issued an injunction on 26th July 2006, allowing the 83rd AGM to proceed on 27th July 2006 for certain agenda items while adjourning others. Despite this, the appellant filed a contempt petition against the Managing Director for allegedly disobeying the court's order. The learned Single Judge granted an ad-interim injunction on 12th June 2008, restraining the implementation of resolutions related to the election of Directors until the disposal of the contempt petition. The Division Bench upheld the maintainability of the intra-court appeals against this order.

3. Transfer of Shares:
Standard Chartered Bank, acting as an agent for some investors, filed applications for the transfer of 95,418 shares. The Board of Directors resolved to transfer these shares on 13th May 2007. The appellant filed another suit (C.S. No.481 of 2008) questioning this transfer and seeking a permanent injunction against the exercise of shareholder rights by the transferees.

4. Validity of Elections of Directors:
The elections of Directors at the AGMs held on 5th June 2008 were contested. The appellant sought an injunction to restrain the election of Directors, which was not granted. The learned Single Judge noted that the appellant had adopted dubious methods, including forum shopping and suppression of material facts, to obtain an interim order in the contempt petition. The Division Bench dismissed the appeals, emphasizing the appellant's conduct and the lack of a prima facie case for an injunction.

5. Maintainability of Appeals under Contempt of Courts Act:
The appellant argued that an appeal under Section 19(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, was not maintainable against an ad-interim order of injunction. The respondents contended that the appeal was maintainable under both Section 19(1) of the Contempt of Courts Act and Clause 15 of the Letters Patent of the Madras High Court. The Supreme Court held that an appeal would be maintainable if an interim order was passed without jurisdiction and adversely affected the respondents. The Court also emphasized that access to justice is a fundamental right and that an aggrieved person cannot be left without a remedy.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, noting the appellant's conduct, including forum shopping and suppression of facts, and the lack of a prima facie case for an injunction. The Court upheld the Division Bench's decision on the maintainability of the appeals and emphasized the importance of equitable relief and access to justice. The appeals were dismissed with costs, and the Court discouraged forum shopping and abuse of the judicial process.

← Previous Next →