TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (7) TMI 307
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under section 10F of the Companies Act 1 of 1956, against an order of the Company Law Board can be entertained by the High Court in exercise of its 'ordinary original civil jurisdiction'? 2.Whether such an appeal can be filed in the form of a petition to the company court by following the procedure prescribed for making original application to the company court under the Companies (Court) Rule, 1959, instead of presenting a memorandum of appeal formulating questions of law arising out of the order under appeal? 3.Whether such an appeal is liable to be heard by a single judge or Division Bench on the original side or appellate side till the appropriate rules are made and published by the appropriate authority in this behalf?" The b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Companies (Amendment) Act, 1988, with effect from May 31, 1991. Before this amendment, the High Court was empowered to entertain petitions under sections 397 and 398 of the Act. By this amendment, this original jurisdiction has been transferred to the Company Law Board. Having transferred the jurisdiction to the Company Law Board, an appeal to the High Court has been provided on any question of law arising out of such an order. Section 2(11) of the Act defines the term "the court" as meaning "with respect to any matter relating to a company, the court having jurisdiction under this Act with respect to that matter relating to that company, as provided in section 10". Section 10(1) of the Act specifies that the court having jurisdiction un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ercise of the original jurisdiction of the High Court shall be heard before such judges as the Chief Justice shall from time to time appoint." (emphasis supplied) We are concerned with the expression "company matters". In the absence of any qualification, it would mean and include all its varieties-original as well as appellate. It may be mentioned that as per rule 986A all applications under the Act in respect of areas of the State of Maharashtra (excluding Vidarbha region) in respect of which under section 10(1) of the Act, the High Court has jurisdiction, shall be filed in the office of the prothonotary and senior master, i.e., the original side. There is no scope even to have a lurking doubt on this score, in view of the Rules on ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....In this connection, a submission was made in one voice by all learned counsel before us that it would be better if this jurisdiction of the High Court is described as "company civil jurisdiction" and not "ordinary original civil jurisdiction". This undoubtedly is a matter of mere form but it is submitted that the separate description would remove the anomaly and facilitate the identification of the matters. In our view, the suggestion is just and proper and can be considered at the appropriate level and stage. The learned single judge has relied upon the Supreme Court decision in the case of National Sewing Thread Co. Ltd. v. James Chadwick and Bros. Ltd., AIR 1953 SC 357, in taking a prima facie view that in the absence of Rules, appeal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sage from the case of Arati Dutta v. Eastern Tea Estates Pvt. Ltd. [1988] 64 Comp. Cas. 313 ; AIR 1988 SC 325, may be usefully quoted (at page 325 of 64 Comp. Cas.): "It is true that there is perhaps no procedure to file an appeal from the decision of the learned single judge of the Gauhati High Court. If that is so, rules should be framed by the High Court in its jurisdiction of rule making power for filing and disposal of such appeals. But absence of the procedure rules does not take away a litigant's right to file such appeals when the statute confers such a right specifically and also the jurisdiction of the High Court to dispose of such an appeal if so filed." In view of the consistent practice followed by all concerned in labell....