9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hairmanship stating that whatever is happening in the 1st Respondent company is against the interests of the 1st respondent company. These issues are pending consideration in the main Company Petition and a separate order is not necessary now as to whether mismanagement is there in the 1st Respondent Company. These matters will be considered at the time of final disposal of the Company Petition. Moreover, the respondents in their counter stated that they are ready to disclose an oath the exact nature of the arrangements they have with various Broadcasters and produce all the documents and when demanded by this Tribunal. They are also ready to produce the copies of various interconnection agreements executed by the 1st Respondent company. In view of the submission of Respondents, they are directed to produce the aforesaid documents in a sealed cover before this Tribunal during the time of final hearing of the Company Petition. At this moment it is not necessary to stay the operation of Annexure A 10, by which certain decisions have been taken in the Board of Directors Meeting held on 17.07.2021, such as the outsourcing of maintenance of accounts of the Company, to outsource th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion (Broadcasting and Cable Service) Interconnection (Digital Addressable Cable Television System) Regulations, 2012 (Telecommunication Regulations) forbids the collection of placement fees (vide the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection (Digital Addressable Cable Television Systems) (First Amendment) Regulations, 2012. 4. Therefore, the applicant stated that any amount collected or charged by the 3'd respondent on a broadcaster is illegal. On the other hand, it is the specific case of the Applicant that the 3rd respondent was illegally collecting brokerage charges from various broadcasters, which is to be enquired into as to the nature of the relationship between the 3rd respondent with the broadcasters and more particularly the basis on which the 3rd respondent has, in his own name, raised the invoice on a broadcaster. A crime has been registered against respondents 2 to 4 as Crime No. 172 of 2021 at Ernakulam Town North Police Station and the Sessions Court has granted anticipatory bail to the respondents 2. 5. The learned counsel for the applicant argued that the public prosecutor, after going through the case diary has clearly pointed ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed that the 1st Respondent Company was incorporated on 03.10.2012. Till 2016 1st Respondent Company was Digital Distribution Centre and thereafter during 2017, 1st Respondent Company has entered into an agreement with various pay channels and started formal operations. The 3rd Respondent was carrying on its business well before the incorporation of the 1st Respondent Company and regular transactions with various Broadcasters. It is evident from the TDS certificate that the 3rd Respondent had already transactions with Broadcasters well before the incorporation of 1st Respondent Company. The 3rd Respondent has transactions with various Broadcasters well before the incorporation of 1st Respondent Company and he has got more than twelve years relationship with various broadcasters. At the inception stage, the 1st Respondent Company was operating through analog equipment provided by the 3rd Respondent. 3rd Respondent's relationship and experience were one of the major forces behind the growth of the 1st Respondent Company. 9. It is not true that the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection (Digital Addressable Cable Television Systems) Regulations, 2012 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the majority decision of the Board of Directors and with an ulterior intention to delay the legal proceedings by the Respondents, the Applicant has filed Original Suit No. 302 of 2021 before the Munsiff Court, Ernakulam and IA No. 2 of 2021 in Suit No. O.S 302 of 2021 alleging that the Respondents and CS Vivek Kumar, Authorized Representative of 1st Respondent Company have illegally accessed and corrected the books and accounts of the 1st Respondent company. Accordingly, in IA No. 2 of 2021 in Suit No. O.S 302 of 2021 the Munsiff Court, Ernakulam has passed an ex-parte order restraining Respondents and CS Vivek Kumar, from making illegal corrections, alternations, modifications or changes or committing any acts of waste in the account's files and books of the 1st Respondent Company. 14. The respondents further stated that under the Chairmanship of applicant, the 1st Respondent Company has outsourced its accounts to outside agencies. The notes to agenda attached with the Board meeting notice clearly stated the reasons for outsourcing the accounts of the 1st Respondent company. The decision to outsource has been taken with a view to increase the revenue collection during ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jecting to at that time, now he has come forward with this application after his removal from the Chairmanship stating that whatever is happening in the 1st Respondent company is against the interests of the 1st respondent company. These issues are pending consideration in the main Company Petition and a separate order is not necessary now as to whether mismanagement is there in the 1st Respondent Company. These matters will be considered at the time of final disposal of the Company Petition. 19. Moreover, the respondents in their counter stated that they are ready to disclose an oath the exact nature of the arrangements they have with various Broadcasters and produce all the documents and when demanded by this Tribunal. They are also ready to produce the copies of various interconnection agreements executed by the 1st Respondent company. 20. In view of this submission of Respondents, they are directed to produce the aforesaid documents in a sealed cover before this Tribunal during the time of final hearing of the Company Petition. At this moment it is not necessary to stay the operation of Annexure A 10, by which certain decisions have been taken in the Board of Directors Me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
