9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 293X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h is required to be framed in an appeal u/s 10F which has been decided wrongly in the order of the CLB, which calls for correction or any gross injustice having occurred to the appellants to warrant interference in an appeal of this nature. Appeal dismissed - CO. APPEAL NO. 1 OF 2012 - - - Dated:- 15-6-2012 - D.V. SHYLENDRA KUMAR AND B. MANOHAR, JJ. K.S. Harish for the Appellant. JUDGMENT Shylendra Kumar, J. This appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956, (for short the Act) is by the petitioners in Company Petition No. 10/2008, which was disposed of by the Company Law Board, Additional Principal Bench, Chennai, on 11.1.2012, a company petition which was filed under Sections 397 and 398 of the Act as also under S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arlier shareholding of the petitioners be restored and the company also handed back to the petitioners etc. 3. But at the same time taking note of the fact of 2nd respondent having worked for the company and having invested certain amounts, he should be suitably compensated and for valuing the compensation payable to the 2nd respondent, an auditor was appointed as Commissioner and both the parties were required to work in coordination with the Board appointed auditor to arrive the amount, which was required to be paid to the 2nd respondent, as compensation to the services provided to the company etc. 4. In the process, the Company Law Board had directed that the property owned by the petitioners has to be retained as it is; that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal of this nature. 8. However, Sri Harish, learned counsel submits that the appellants are left high and dry and even in respect of valuation by the auditor if they are not really satisfied, with such valuation, as they are not left with option to object to the valuation, with the disposal of the appeal as in terms of the report of the Commissioner they will have to make payment and will not have a say in the matter as in terms of the impugned order, they will have to make payment and therefore, are pre-empted from pointing out anomalies if any in the valuation or the report and hence does warrant interference by this court. 9. It is open to the appellants to point out this aspect before the Company Law Board as and when the comm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
