Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (11) TMI 853

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e respondents in the appeal, who may be referred to as the Pawan Group, held a minority shareholding in the appellant-company, the majority shares being held by the Vipin Group. There was only a slender margin in the percentage of holding. It is not necessary to go into much detail about the circumstances in which the Pawan Group filed company petition No.43(ND)/2013 before the CLB; suffice to note that the petition was filed under Sections 397-398 of the Companies Act alleging oppression and mis-management against the Vipin Group. A property had been acquired by the company in Noida at D-11, Sector-18. This property was sold in November, 2011. The sale proceeds were used to acquire some other properties. The balance amount was credited to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... would earn a maximum interest @ 8.10% as projected by the Bank in its email dated 10/05/2013. The interest of the Petitioners is well protected and no prejudice is caused to them because in any case they claim entitlement only to 50% of the actual proceeds of the Fixed Deposit. By putting a sum of Rs. 13.5 crores in Fixed Deposit the alleged claim of the Petitioner will always remain protected. 9. I therefore direct R-8 to deposit Rs. 13.5 crores from the balance lying in the Current Account No.001484100001625 of R-1 as Fixed Deposit for a period 45 days from today. In the absence of any further directions, the said Fixed Deposit shall keep rolling over for a further period of 45 days. The remaining amount lying in the above-mentioned Curr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal is directed against the orders of the CLB dated 17.05.2013 as clarified by the order dated 23.07.2013. 8. The contention put forth on behalf of the appellants is this. The interest from the fixed deposit had always been used for the purpose of the business of Manaktala Chemicals Ltd. In fact, the interest amount on the deposit of Rs. 13.5 crores was substantial and was used to revive the company business. Even according to the order passed by the CLB on 17.05.2013, the interest of the Pawan Group was well protected by the deposit of Rs. 13.5 crores in the fixed deposit account because, as noted by the CLB, in any case the Pawan Group claimed entitlement only to 50% of the proceeds of the fixed deposit. Therefore, the Pawan Group wou .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ue and erode the asset-base of the company and would drastically bring down the value of the shares, prejudicially affecting any buy-out proposals which may be made by the CLB in the main petition filed under Section 397-398; at any rate, there is no evidence brought on record by the appellants to show that but for the interest accruing on the fixed deposit the company is cash-starved. 10. In the brief rejoinder, it was submitted on behalf of the appellants that the consent given by them was only for depositing the amount of Rs. 13.5 crores in fixed deposit and that there was no consent given for the further direction of the CLB that both the fixed deposit and the interest accrued thereon shall be rolled over for a further period or period .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... amount of Rs. 13.5 crores. The question whether the CLB intended that only the principal amount should be reinvested on maturity of the fixed deposit or whether the principal and the interest accrued should be reinvested, is not by any means a question of law. It is a question of the intention of the CLB and such intention was clarified by the CLB in its order dated 23.07.2013. In this order, it was clarified by the CLB that it meant and intended that both the principal and the interest accrued shall be reinvested. When once the clarification was given, there was an end of the matter so far as what the CLB intended and that cannot give rise to any question of law. On this point alone the appellants have to fail. 12. There is also force in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates