Just a moment...
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 a suit seeking rectification of the register of members under section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956 was maintainable in the High Court despite the valuation being Rs. 1,300, and whether the suit could be treated as a petition under that section.
Analysis: Section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956 provides a summary remedy by application or petition, but it does not abrogate the ordinary civil remedy by suit. Where the claim is brought as a regular suit, the High Court must test its competence under the ordinary rules of civil jurisdiction, including pecuniary limits. A proceeding under the Companies Act jurisdiction is distinct from a civil suit in the High Court's ordinary original civil jurisdiction. Since the suit was valued below the High Court's pecuniary limit, it was not within that jurisdiction. The suit also could not be converted into a petition under section 155 because the two jurisdictions are different and the court was not exercising Companies Act jurisdiction in the suit.
Conclusion: The suit was not maintainable in the High Court and was liable to be dismissed; the request to treat it as a petition under section 155 was rejected.
Ratio Decidendi: A claim for rectification of the register of members may be pursued by summary application under section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956, but a regular suit for the same relief remains subject to the ordinary civil court rules on jurisdiction and cannot be treated as a petition in the Companies Act jurisdiction.