9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 698X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el agreed that the order passed by us in the first of the above appeals would govern the result in the remaining appeals. We shall, therefore, refer to the facts in the first appeal. 3. The learned judge has in his detailed judgment rejected each of the points raised by the appellants. Considering the facts of the present case, we do not think it necessary to deal with the questions of law raised by the appellants and decided by the learned judge. Though only prima facie, we are of the opinion that no fault can be found with the judgment of the learned judge on any of the points decided by him. However, in the facts of this case we are of the opinion that the question of law does not arise, and the above appeals ought to be dismissed on facts. 4. As we are in agreement with the learned single judge, we will refer to the facts only briefly. The respondent filed Company Petition No. 39 of 2003, before the Company Law Board seeking permission to investigate the affairs of the company in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 237(b)(i) of the Companies Act. The application was based on material gathered from three sources, viz., the report of the Joint Parliamentary Committee, rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... heir powers under Section 209A of the Companies Act, carried out investigations and submitted a preliminary report. The investigation is still in progress. 6. Whether the aforesaid entities had in fact, carried on business, as alleged by the respondents or not is another matter. We are satisfied that the facts disclosed in these reports warranted, to say the least, investigations of every type, including in exercise of powers under Section 237 of the Companies Act. 7. The Company Law Board by its order dated September 27, 2004, impugned in the appeals filed before the learned single judge held that grounds were made out for carrying out an investigation under Section 237(b)(i). The Company Law Board held that the allegations of fraud and scams against the aforesaid corporate entities warranted the said investigation. The Company Law Board accordingly allowed the company petition and permitted the Department of Company Affairs to carry out investigations under Section 237, into the affairs of each of the aforesaid companies. The Company Law Board passed a common order dated September 22, 2004. The sixteen appeals before the learned single judge challenged this order of the Company L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the question of law raised by Mr. Seervai. The question of law would arise only if Mr. Seervai succeeded in satisfying us that in fact, the aforesaid companies had seized to carry on any business within the meaning of that expression in Section 237(b)(i). Section 237 reads as under: 237. Without prejudice to its power under Section 235, the Central Government.- (a) shall appoint one or more competent persons as inspectors to investigate the affairs of a company and to report thereon in such manner as the Central Government may direct- (i) the company, by special resolution; or (ii) the court, by order, declares that the affairs of the company ought to be investigated by an inspector appointed by the Central Government; and (b) may do so, in its opinion or in the opinion of the tribunal there are circumstances suggesting- (i) that the business of the company is being conducted with intend to defraud its creditors, members or any other person, or otherwise for a fraudulent or unlawful purpose, or in a manner oppressive to any of its members, or that the company was formed for any fraudulent or unlawful purpose ; (ii) that persons concerned in the formation of the company or the man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - The said paragraphs read as under: 3(b). It is incumbent that in order to achieve this objective, the functioning of the applicant/respondent group of companies ought not to be crippled which situation would inevitably result if the order dated September 27, 2004, passed by this hon'ble Board is not amended for the purpose of determining the real question, as would be evident from the averments made hereinafter in this application. 3(f)- This is a very critical juncture for the respondents/applicants when sincere efforts are being made to liquidate dues of banks and creditors. Any circumstances which stalls even remotely such efforts would be grossly against public interest. 6. It is stated in this connection that the following details of payment made by the applicant group of companies and value of shares/ properties lying with the bank: It may be mentioned that out of the figures indicated above, even as recently as during the period ranging between September 11, 2004, and November 4, 2004, securities worth Rs. 15,18,02,166.05 (rupees fifteen crores eighteen lakhs two thousand one hundred and sixty-six and paise five), held by the Ketan Parekh group with Madhavpura Mercanti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
