9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 1221 - Tri - Companies LawMisappropriation of property - petitioners are are the shareholders in the first Respondent company and together they are holding 37% of shares of the issued capital - allegation that the Respondents are misappropriating the property of the first Respondent company and in case the property is sold and consideration is taken by the Respondents in their personal accounts, they will deprive the Petitioners of their rights - HELD THAT - The petitioners have made out prima facie case, balance of convenience is in the favour of Petitioners and in case the property of the Respondent No. 1 is sold, the same will cause irreparable loss to the Petitioners and Respondent No. 7. This cannot be compensated in terms of money. The Respondents no. 2 to 7 are restrained from selling property of the Respondent no. 1. till further orders. Besides this, the Respondents are also directed not to change the share holding pattern of the first Respondent company without seeking prior permission from this Tribunal - List the matter on 12 th November 2020.
Issues: Shareholders' rights, Misappropriation of property, Injunction against selling property, Change in shareholding pattern
In this case before the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, the Petitioners, who are shareholders in the first Respondent company holding 37% of its shares, alleged that the Respondents were selling company property and diverting the proceeds to their personal accounts, thus depriving the Petitioners of their rights. The Petitioners sought relief, claiming a prima facie case, arguing that the balance of convenience favored them, and asserting that irreparable loss would occur if the property was sold. The Tribunal found merit in the Petitioners' contentions and issued an injunction restraining Respondents 2 to 7 from selling the company's property until further orders. Additionally, the Respondents were directed not to alter the shareholding pattern without prior permission from the Tribunal. The Petitioners were instructed to provide a copy of the order to the Respondents for compliance. The matter was listed for further hearing on 12th November 2020.
|
