2007 (1) TMI 268

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Government of India with Delhi Paper Products Company Private Limited and its "subsidiaries" for 10 years with effect from 30-12-2002. The impugned orders have been passed on the basis that one of the directors of Delhi Paper Products Company (P.) Ltd. was also working as a director in the petitioner companies and, therefore, the petitioner companies were subsidiaries of Delhi Paper Products Company (P.) Ltd. and consequently they would also be covered by the ban imposed by the order dated 30-12-2002. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners, firstly, contended that the petitioner companies are not subsidiaries of Delhi Paper Products Company Private Limited within the meaning ascribed to the word "subsidiary" as appearing in section 4....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the directors was allegedly common to Delhi Paper Products Company Private Limited does not make the petitioner companies subsidiaries of Delhi Paper Products Company Private Limited. It has to be examined as to whether the Board of Directors of Delhi Paper Products Company Private Limited exercises authority and control over the boards of the petitioner companies so as to control and determine their composition. 3. It was further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the orders dated 15-1-2003 and 17-1-2003 were passed without issuing any notice to the petitioners and obviously no hearing was granted to the petitioners either. Therefore, they had no occasion to point out that the petitioners would not fall within the....