Private company's suit against ex-director allowed: Civil court has jurisdiction.

The court held that the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain a suit filed by a private limited company against a former managing director for rendition of accounts. The court emphasized that the exclusion of civil court jurisdiction under the Companies Act should be strictly construed. As the suit did not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the court under the Companies Act, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the lower court's judgment, and remitted the suit for trial on merits. The parties were directed to appear before the lower court for further proceedings, and the court fee paid for the appeal was ordered to be refunded.

---

---

Issues:
Jurisdiction of civil court under the Companies Act for rendition of accounts.

Analysis:
The plaintiff, a private limited company, filed a suit against the former managing director for rendition of accounts. The defendant contended that the suit was not maintainable due to lack of jurisdiction under section 10 of the Companies Act. The Subordinate Judge dismissed the suit solely based on jurisdiction. The key question was whether the civil court had jurisdiction to entertain the action for accounts.

The court analyzed Section 10 of the Companies Act, which defines the court's jurisdiction based on the location of the company's registered office. The court emphasized that the exclusion of civil court jurisdiction should be strictly construed and not readily inferred. It was noted that the civil court would lack jurisdiction only for matters exclusively falling under the Companies Act.

The court found that the subject matter of the suit, seeking rendition of accounts from a former managing director, did not have specific provisions in the Companies Act for such cases. The court highlighted that Chapter IV-A of the Act dealt with removal of managerial personnel for misconduct during their tenure, not after they had ceased their roles. As a result, the court concluded that the suit did not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the court under the Companies Act, affirming that the ordinary civil court had jurisdiction over the matter.

Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the lower court's judgment, and remitted the suit for trial on merits. The court also directed the parties to appear before the lower court for further proceedings and ordered the refund of the court fee paid for the appeal. The costs of the appeal were made to abide by the result of the suit.

---