2021 (1) TMI 1140 - Tri - Companies Law

Maintainability of order where Judicial Member was transferred - HELD THAT - In view of the order passed by the special Bench on 06.05.2020 directing petitioner company to hold meeting on 14.05.2020, in compliance of order the Applicant company has filed the compliance affidavit along with chairman s report of the meeting of equity shareholders, which is taken on record. Therefore, nothing survives in this Application. Application disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
- Delay in pronouncement of order due to transfer of Judicial Member
- Inability to hold equity shareholders meeting due to lockdown
- Compliance with directions given by the special bench

Analysis:
1. Delay in Pronouncement of Order: The judgment highlights a delay in pronouncing the order due to the transfer of the Judicial Member who was initially part of the Bench. The order was reserved on 05.03.2020 by the erstwhile Bench, but due to the transfer of the Judicial Member, the order couldn't be pronounced. This delay led to the matter being heard before a special bench on 06.05.2020, where certain directions were given regarding the holding of equity shareholders' meetings.

2. Inability to Hold Equity Shareholders Meeting: The judgment mentions that despite notices being duly issued to all equity shareholders, the meeting could not be held as scheduled on 20.04.2020 due to the lockdown imposed by the government in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The counsel sought an enlargement of time to hold the meetings through video-conferencing after providing due notice. Subsequently, the special bench directed the petitioner company to hold the meeting on 14.05.2020.

3. Compliance with Directions: The Applicant company filed a compliance affidavit along with the chairman's report of the meeting of equity shareholders, which was taken on record. The judgment states that in compliance with the order passed by the special bench on 06.05.2020, the Applicant company fulfilled the requirements, and as a result, the Application was disposed of. The judgment concludes that nothing further remains to be addressed in C.A. (CAA) No. 546 of 2020, given the actions taken by the Applicant company in response to the directions provided by the special bench.