Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1981 (10) TMI 137

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... with S. K. Galothra for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Rajendra Nath Mittal, J. - This petition has been filed under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinaftercalled "the Act") by 468 persons for various reliefs mentioned therein. It was contested by respondents Nos. 1 to 9 and 11, inter alia, on the ground that the petition has not been filed by the requisite number of members ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h of the total number of its members." It is evident from a reading of the sub-section that a petition under section 397 or section 398 can be filed by not less than 1/5th of the total number of members of the company. In the present case, the total number of members admittedly was 1,545. Therefore, the petition could have been filed by 309 members. The petition is purported to have been filed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r, Dial Chand, at serial No. 194 had died 2½ years prior to that date. The affidavit was attested on 14th January, 1976. The petition bears the date 22nd of September, 1975. Thus, according to the affidavit, he had died prior to the filing of the petition. Therefore, according to the respondents, the names of 287 persons should be excluded from the petitioners. The petitioners have filed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Ltd. v. A. Nageswara Rao [1956] 26 Comp. Cas. 91 (SC) and In re Bengal Luxmi Cotton Mills Ltd. [1965] 35 Comp. Cas. 187 (Cal.) On the other hand, it has been argued by the learned counsel for the respondents that the consent of 165 persons was obtained by the petitioners by misrepresentation and, if it is so, it cannot be deemed to be consent for filing the petition. I have heard the learned co....