Defective board resolution cannot justify rejection; appeal and rectification matter remanded for fresh merits-based decision after hearing.

A rejection of an appeal and rectification application based only on a non-serious defect in the supporting board resolution could not be sustained. The Bombay High Court held that the impugned orders were unjustified and required reconsideration on merits, especially where earlier interference had been taken in similar matters on substantially identical grounds. The orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for de novo consideration after hearing both sides.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal order and rectification order rejecting the petitioner's appeal and rectification application on the ground of a defective board resolution could be sustained.

Analysis: The resolution was found not to suffer from any serious defect warranting rejection of the appeal or the rectification application. The impugned orders were also viewed against the backdrop of earlier interference in similar matters on substantially identical grounds, and the same reasoning was adopted. The matter was therefore directed to be reconsidered afresh on merits after hearing the parties.

Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded to the second respondent for de novo consideration with an opportunity of hearing to both sides.

Final Conclusion: The petitioner obtained relief against the rejection orders, but the dispute was sent back for fresh decision on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: A rejection of an appeal or rectification application cannot be sustained merely on an insubstantial or non-serious defect in the supporting board resolution, and the matter must be decided on merits after hearing the parties.

---