9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ition under Section 241 of the Companies Act viz. a) in case of a company having share capital, not less than 100 members of the company; or b) not less than 1/10 of the total number of its members whichever is less; or c) Any member of members holding not less than 1/10 of the issued share capital of the company. Admittedly there were 30 members of Respondent No.1 at the time of filing of Company Petition. Admittedly four of them filed the petition under Section 241 hence condition (b) above viz. not less than 1/10 of the total number of members could apply was fulfilled, thus Company Petition was maintainable. Appeal allowed. - ( Justice Yogesh Khanna ) Member ( Judicial ) And ( Mr. Arun Baroka ) Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e for the factory premises of the company accrued in the Canara Bank Account of the Company at Dehradun. iii. Mr. Anshu Gupta rejoined the board of the company in 2010. On 11.10.2012, the Petitioner Mr. L. K. Bansal was appointed as an additional Director of the company. Later on, Mr. B. L. Bansal and Mr. D. K. Garg resigned from the board. iv. There are 30 members of the Respondent Company and the present petition is being filed by 4 members of the Respondent Company. v. The Petitioners collectively constitute more than 1/10 of the number of members holding the company s share capital and as such the petitioners are eligible under Section 244 to bring an action of oppression mismanagement and seek other reliefs under Section 241 of the Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Petitioner. 3. It is the case of the appellants at the time of filing of the petition under Section 241 of the Companies Act, 2013 there were 30 members/shareholders of Respondent No.1 company, out of which four members have filed the Company Petition, hence the Petitioners were more than 10% of the members and thus fulfilled the criteria, as envisaged in Section 244 of the Companies Act, 2013. It is argued the learned NCLT had misunderstood the provisions of Section 244 as is evident from the impugned order below:- 8. Analysis and Findings: i. We have heard the Ld. Counsels for both parties and also perused the documents available on record. ii. Before going into the merits of the present case, it is relevant to ascertain the maintainabi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... threshold of not less than one hundred members of the company or not less than onetenth of the total number of its members, whichever is less or (ii) any member or members holding not less than one-tenth of the issued share capital of the company. vi. The Petitioners had placed on record the details of shareholders of the Respondent Company, which shows that a total number of 30 shareholders are holding a cumulative share capital of Rs.86,70,620 /-, whereas the present petition is jointly filed by a total 4 petitioners aggregately holding 8.16% of the paid up share capital of the Respondent Company. vii. We find force in the contention made by the Respondents that the Petitioners constitute only 8.16% i.e. 70752 shares out of 867062 shares ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
