2000 (9) TMI 976

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndia being one of the secured creditors and intervener before the CLB, is the revision petitioner before this Court. 2. Though the civil miscellaneous petitions are posted for disposal, the main revision petition itself had been taken up for disposal and heard. 3. A perusal of the order of the CLB discloses that the Board has been receiving large number of complaints from depositors under section 45-QA for the payment of deposits against Kirloskar Investments and Finance Limited from August, 1999. It is reported that the Bench had received more than 1000 applications with aggregate amount for non payment of Rs. 340 lakhs on matured deposits. The applications came up for hearing at different stages. According to the company it was not ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tion is not maintainable. (B) Under section 10F, an appeal lies only before the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the registered office of the company is situate. The registered office of the company is only at Bangalore and therefore it is only the High Court of Karnataka, which will have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the appeal under section 10F of the Companies Act, notwithstanding the fact that the CLB, Southern Regional Bench, Chennai had passed the impugned order. 7. It is also pointed out on behalf of the respondents, an appeal has already been filed before the Karnataka High Court as against the order of the CLB and the revision petitioner before this Court is also a party in the said appeal. 8. As f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....enior Counsel for the petitioner is that a Constitutional revision under article 227 is not at all barred before the Madras High Court, since the CLB was situate within the jurisdiction of this Court. He would also state that an appeal under section 10F of the Companies Act would arise only on the grounds stated therein. The CLB had no jurisdiction to order payment only to the depositors to the exclusion of the financial institutions and therefore such an order which was without jurisdiction was questionable before this Court under article 227. 12. I am unable to accept the contentions of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner. It is true that the Tribunal may be constituted within the territorial limits of this Court, but the jur....