9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 669X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ayer that was sought for in the application and considered by the Company Law Board in the impugned order was to restrain holding of the EGM and to prevent Respondents 2 and 3 from removing the appellant from the Board of Directors of Respondent No. 1-Company under section 284(3) of the Companies Act – Held that:- no exceptional ground is made out and the Company Law Board has observed that conven ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he outcome of the Company Petition. 2. The appellant herein filed the Company Application under Regulation 44 of the Company Law Board Regulations, 1991, seeking to restrain the respondents from removing the petitioner as a Director from the Board of the respondent-company under section 284(3) of the Companies Act in the proposed EGM to be convened on 12-5-2011. It was the contention of the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nary General Body Meeting shall be subject to the outcome of the Company Petition. 4. Being aggrieved by the said order, this appeal is filed by the appellant-petitioner before the Company Law Board. 5. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the petitioner and Respondents 2 and 8 are the only Directors in the Company - Respondent No. 1 and attempt has been made for rem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the appellant from the Board of Directors of Respondent No. 1-Company under section 284(3) of the Companies Act. It is well-settled that this Court in appeal, would be slow to interfere with the discretion exercised by the Company Law Board while granting or rejecting the interim application for directions, unless some exceptional ground is made out for interference. Having regard to the above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
