Just a moment...
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the court had power, in proceedings under section 186 of the Companies Act, to grant interlocutory protection by interim order and whether the existing interim order should be modified to permit completion of pre-existing contracts and related payments.
Analysis: Section 186 was read as clarifying the nature of directions that may be given for calling, holding, and conducting the meeting, but not as limiting the court's general or inherent powers to make interlocutory orders necessary to prevent the petition from being rendered infructuous or the ends of justice from being defeated. The procedure under section 141 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was treated as applicable, and sections 94 and 151 of that Code were relied upon as recognising the court's authority to make interlocutory and inherent orders to secure substantial justice and prevent abuse of process. On the facts placed before the court, the company faced potential loss if already entered contracts were not carried out and payments were not made.
Conclusion: The court held that it had power to grant interlocutory relief in the proceedings and modified the interim order to the extent of permitting the company to complete the existing agreements and make payments in respect thereof.