Bona fide dispute as to title bars summary relief under Section 630; contested property rights belong to the civil court.

Section 630 of the Companies Act presupposes that the company's property is not subject to a bona fide dispute; where a genuine contest exists about whether the company has an existing proprietary interest-including disputes over characterization of agreements as lease or licence or claims of direct tenancy-the summary procedure under Section 630 is unsuited to resolve title questions. Consequently, disputes raising conflicting evidence or pending declaratory and injunction proceedings are civil in nature and must be left to the civil court, placing such matters outside the scope of a criminal summary inquiry under Section 630.

---

---

Issues: Whether, under Section 630 of the Companies Act, a criminal magistrate exercising summary jurisdiction can determine a bona fide dispute as to title or property which is essentially a civil question, or whether such dispute must be left to the civil court.

Analysis: Section 630 presupposes that the property in question is a definite property of the company and not the subject of a bona fide dispute; the procedure under s. 630 is summary and unsuited to resolving contested questions of title. Where parties raise a genuine dispute about whether the company has any existing interest in the property (including disputes arising from interpretation of agreements as lease or licence, or claims of direct tenancy by the accused), the issue is purely civil in nature and should be determined by the civil court. The existence of pending civil proceedings (declaratory suit and injunction) and material conflicting evidence about the nature and effect of the agreements indicate a bona fide dispute that falls outside the ambit of a criminal summary inquiry under s. 630.

Conclusion: The dispute as to title/property is bona fide and of a civil nature and therefore outside the scope of inquiry under Section 630 of the Companies Act; the Sessions Judge was correct in holding that the matter should be left to the civil court. Decision in favour of Respondent.

---