TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appellate Tribunal allows appeal on limitation; recognizes continuing causes of action.</h1> <h3>Esquire Electronics Inc. and Ors. Versus Netherlands India Communications Enterprises Ltd. and Ors.</h3> Esquire Electronics Inc. and Ors. Versus Netherlands India Communications Enterprises Ltd. and Ors. - [2017] 205 Comp Cas 552 Issues:1. Limitation period for filing the Company Petition.2. Locus standi of the appellants to file the Company Petition.3. Allegations of oppression and mismanagement between 2013 and 2015.Analysis:1. The judgment involves an appeal by Esquire Electronics Inc. and another against the National Company Law Tribunal's order dismissing their Company Petition under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act 2013 as time-barred, imposing costs on them. The Tribunal found the petition barred by limitation, as it attempted to address issues from 2000 to 2012, ruling the appellants lacked locus standi. The Appellate Tribunal agreed on the limitation aspect but considered continuing causes of action post-2012 valid, not barred by limitation, remitting the case for further consideration.2. The appellants claimed shareholding in the respondent company, alleging illegal dilution by other respondents. The Tribunal dismissed the petition, questioning the appellants' locus standi as they were neither directors nor shareholders of the respondent company. However, the Appellate Tribunal disagreed, citing evidence of shareholding in the respondent company by the appellants, establishing locus standi to file the petition for alleged oppression and mismanagement, overturning the Tribunal's finding.3. The appellants alleged inaction by the respondents post-2012, including failure to conduct AGMs and circulate audited balance sheets. The Tribunal found the petition time-barred for issues up to 2012. Still, the Appellate Tribunal recognized continuing causes of action post-2012, not barred by limitation, directing the Tribunal to consider the petition's merit for alleged oppression and mismanagement between 2013 and 2015. The appeal was partly allowed for the period post-2012, remitting the case for further proceedings.
TaxTMI 