9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 360X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d extreme hardship due to the COVID 19 as he has not received his remuneration as a director of the company since October 2016. Considering the so called 'Urgency', the application was listed for hearing today through Video Conferencing by giving notice to both applicant and the respondents. The applicant has submitted that Respondent No. 1 is a family company of the members of Gupta family. The applicant and respondent No. 2 are brothers. Respondent No. 3 is the son of Respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 4 is wife of respondent No. 3. Respondent No. 5 is the Company Secretary engaged with the respondent No. 1 Company. 2. It has transpired that it is not a new matter or an issue which has crept into in between the parties in the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fresh EOGM. 4. The applicant being aggrieved from the said order dated 4th October, 2019 filed an appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) being Company Appeal (AT) No. 297 of 2019 and the NCLAT dismissed the appeal by an order dated January 22, 2020. 5. The appellant had thereafter filed a Civil appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India being Civil Appeal No. 1648 of 2020 which is stated to be pending. Last order was passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on February 28, 2020, and in view of the pandemic COVID 19, the civil appeal still remains pending awaiting a hearing. 6. It is stated that this Tribunal had also considered the matter on 20th February, 2020 and was pleased to pass an order permitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The only item of business was the proposed removal of the petitioner as a director of the company under provisions of section 169 of the Companies Act, 2013. However, the applicant states that in view of the lockdown declared by the Central Government in the last week of March 2020 that the EoGM of the company which was to be held on April 15, 2020 was adjourned and no EoGM could be held on April 15, 2020. 8. The main issue put across by way of the present application is that the applicant has not received his remuneration @ Rs. 1,10,000/- per month as a director of the company since October 2016, although the other directors of the company have continuously received their salary from the company unlike the applicant. The applicant state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... employees contribution to the PF department up to 31st March, 2020, then in that case the unpaid dues of the applicant will be Rs. 51,08,215.562 (inclusive of interest). An application for the same relief is admittedly pending before this Tribunal, being I.A. No. 328/KB/2017 as well as the pending company petition. 9. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Joy Saha submitted on behalf of the respondents that he would like to submit that there had been an EoG.M. on 30.9.2016 which was attended by the applicant in which a resolution was passed that the applicant would no more be an Executive Director and would be working as a Non Executive Director without remuneration. After that Resolution, the applicant stopped functioning for the Company. The coun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is no outstanding salary due to the Petitioner. Petitioner has stopped attending day to day office since December, 2015 and is unaware of the current business activities of the company. He is demanding salary without giving any efforts in the business of the company, on the contrary Petitioner is engaged in anti-business activities and is writing letters to various parties and giving misleading information by which, the company is losing its goodwill. Presently during the Covid-19 period no director has drawn salary for the months of April, and May. Also, none of the employees of the company has been paid any salary during the lockdown period. The business of the company has suffered and there is a complete shutdown of business due to lockd ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cutive director to a Non Executive Director, which meeting was attended by the applicant and the Resolution is stated to have been challenged by the applicant. There is no use keeping this application on board particularly when an application on the same and similar facts is already filed and pending. Prima facie, we are convinced that the applicant has not been able to prove even that he ever worked for the company as a director or as an employee for which he deserved some remuneration or salary as an interim measure. In view of the documents placed on record, discussions, arguments advanced, we do not think it to be a fit case for passing any interim orders or keep this petition for further consideration. (ii) In the result this unnumber ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
