9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t case, there was no notice served on respondent No. 2 and order of Company Law Board which is under challenge in these two appeals would indicate that at various places namely, paragraphs 11 and 16, it has been indicated as though service of notice on respondent No. 2 is effected or completed which otherwise was not. This is the factual error which has occurred. Order passed by the Company Law Board, Southern Region Bench, Chennai dated 15.05.2012 is hereby set aside - Matter is remitted back to the Company Law Board, Southern Region Bench, Chennai for adjudication of petition on merits afresh and in accordance with law - Appeal allowed by way of remand. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner as the member of the company and thereby restoring it the ownership of 15,375,128 (One Crore Fifty Three Lakhs Seventy Five Thousand One Hundred Twenty Eight) equity shares of the company representing 70.50% of the paid up capital of the company together with any bonus shares/rights shares that might have been subsequently issued/allotted in respect of the same. (c) The Respondent Company may be directed to pay to the petitioner all the benefits including dividends that might have been declared subsequently in respect of the above mentioned shares. (d) The Respondent may be directed to pay the costs and damages to the petitioner for the damages sustained by it due to fraudulent transfer of shares. (e) Such further or other orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, they could not serve notice on respondent No. 2. Said submission came to be recorded by the Company Law Board as under: "Heard the Counsel representing the petitioner and xxx by the Respondents No. 1, 3 & 5. Shri. K. Krishnamoorthy, learned Counsel representing the petitioner submitted that in spite of efforts taken by him they could not serve notice on the respondent No.2, who is a necessary party to this petition. He further xxx to the petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner requested this Bench to grant 2 weeks time to get the address of the second respondent and ensured service of notice on them. Failing which, he will take steps in publishing in news paper the pendency of the present petition before this Bench seeking dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent to furnish address of respondent No. 2. Thereafterwards, learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner has made a submission as is evident from the order sheet of Company Law Board dated 06.08.2008 that petitioner would send notice to respondent No. 2 and file "proof of service" within a period of four weeks. Pursuant to the same, notice has been taken out by petitioner and only the receipt for having forwarded the said notice came to be produced before the Company Law Board. Company Law Board without recording as to whether there is service of notice effected, has proceeded to adjudicate the matter on merits. 6. Regulation 21(4) of Company Law Board Regulations, 1991 indicates that issue of notice and its det ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 2 is effected or completed which otherwise was not. This is the factual error which has occurred as is evident from the discussions made herein above. 7. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered view that order passed by the Company Law Board cannot be sustained. Hence, we proceed to pass the following: ORDER (1) Company appeals are hereby allowed. (2) Order passed by the Company Law Board, Southern Region Bench, Chennai dated 15.05.2012 is hereby set aside. (3) Matter is remitted back to the Company Law Board, Southern Region Bench, Chennai for adjudication of petition on merits afresh and in accordance with law. (4) All parties to the present proceedings are directed to appear before the Company Law Board on 03.08 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
