9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1952X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsonance with the observations made in the preceding paragraphs, otherwise will ignore the other facts by deleting such paragraphs from the additional affidavit - the appellant are not allowed to raise any plea with regard to Mr. Ramachandran's presence in the Board's Meeting/EGM Meeting on 31.12.2016, except to the extent it has already been pleaded. The parties are directed to cooperate with the Tribunal to enable the Tribunal to dispose of the company petition expeditiously preferably within one month, uninfluenced by any observations earlier made by the Tribunal - appeal disposed off. - Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson And Mr. Balvinder Singh, Member (Technical) For the Appellants : S/Shri Sumesh Dhawan, Samiron and Ms ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held on 31.12.2012 came to its notice much after the filing of the Company Petition. Immediately on such knowledge, the application for amendment was filed in the year 2013. It is also submitted that the appellant wanted to bring the subsequent development and oppression and mismanagement to the notice of the Tribunal but the same was disallowed. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf the 2nd Respondent refuted the stand taken by the appellant. According to the 2nd Respondent, the representative of the appellant, one Mr. S. Ramachandran, attended the Board Meeting held on 31.12.2012 as also EGM held on the same day and consented to the passing of the Resolutions. It is also disputed that Mr. S. Ramachandran left the Board Meeting due to confrontat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant to bring such facts to the notice of the Tribunal. 6. On the other hand, if the act of 'oppression and mismanagement' relates to earlier period, including both the Meeting dated 31st December, 2012, and the appellant had knowledge of the same directly or through its representative, the same cannot be allowed to be pleaded. 7. Similarly, if during the pendency of the company petition further acts of 'oppression and mismanagement' taken place and is connected with the allegations already made, such as consequential action taken by Respondent, the Tribunal should allow the appellant to bring development to the notice of the Tribunal. 8. On the other hand, if the subsequent acts of 'oppression and mismanagement' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
