https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111304 The Company Law Board was treated as a court subordinate to the High Court for contempt purposes because it exercised judicial powers under the Companies Act, its orders were appealable to the High Court, and its proceedings had court-like attributes. The contempt petition was held to be within limitation because initiation occurred within the one-year period prescribed for contempt proceedings, and later procedural steps did not defeat timeliness. On the facts, continued demolition despite a status quo order, supported by the Commissioner's report and the tribunal's findings, established wilful disobedience and civil contempt against the fifth respondent alone, with penal consequences and costs. en-us Fri, 21 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Dec 2014 22:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111304 The Company Law Board was treated as a court subordinate to the High Court for contempt purposes because it exercised judicial powers under the Companies Act, its orders were appealable to the High Court, and its proceedings had court-like attributes. The contempt petition was held to be within limitation because initiation occurred within the one-year period prescribed for contempt proceedings, and later procedural steps did not defeat timeliness. On the facts, continued demolition despite a status quo order, supported by the Commissioner's report and the tribunal's findings, established wilful disobedience and civil contempt against the fifth respondent alone, with penal consequences and costs. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 21 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111304