https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113558 The Companies Law Board's jurisdiction depended on the statutory bench allocation under the Companies Act, 1956 and the relevant regulations; a matter filed and heard by a bench without assigned subject-matter jurisdiction could not be treated as validly instituted before another bench, so the restraint order on implementation of resolutions was unsustainable. The appellate order under section 10F operated by merger over the earlier Board order on the same subject-matter, leaving that order no longer independently executable and preventing invocation of special execution provisions on that basis. The challenged order was therefore set aside and the application dismissed. en-us Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 Oct 2014 08:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113558 The Companies Law Board's jurisdiction depended on the statutory bench allocation under the Companies Act, 1956 and the relevant regulations; a matter filed and heard by a bench without assigned subject-matter jurisdiction could not be treated as validly instituted before another bench, so the restraint order on implementation of resolutions was unsustainable. The appellate order under section 10F operated by merger over the earlier Board order on the same subject-matter, leaving that order no longer independently executable and preventing invocation of special execution provisions on that basis. The challenged order was therefore set aside and the application dismissed. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113558