AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (2) TMI 588
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 114 of 2007) filed by her before the Company Law Board ('Law Board'). 2. In the petition filed before the Company Law Board the petitioner had claimed that she was the founder director of a company by the name of Montreaux Resorts (P.) Ltd. (hereinafter to be referred as the 'company') which was incorporated in the year 2005, inter alia, with the object of developing and operating tourist resorts and hotels, etc. The petitioner's husband had entered into sale agreements with some land owners in Himachal Pradesh for purchase of land since the petitioner had perceived tremendous potential for tourism in that area. Petitioner's father-in-law, Shri R.P. Khosla, already owned some land in Himachal Pradesh. However, for the purpose of develo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g and they were also treating the company as their personal freedom. So, the petitioner approached the Company Law Board. The reliefs prayed for by the petitioner in her petition before the Company Law Board, inter alia, included an order for removal of Mr. Vikram Bakshi, Mr. Vinod Surha and Mr. Wadia Prakash from the board of directors of the company. Along with that petition an application for some interim directions was also moved. The Company Law Board initially gave a direction to its Bench Officer to authenticate the minute books and account books of the company and the petitioner was allowed to inspect the records. After authenticating the documents the Bench Officer is stated to have made copies of those documents and placed them on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder directing the deferment of that meeting which was going to be held on 26-12-2007. 5. Instead of filing reply to the said application of Khosla group an application (being CA No. 01 of 2008) was moved before the Company Law Board, which was apparently on behalf of the Bakshi Group, for vacating the above order dated 24-12-2007. Responding to the averments made in CA No. 572 of 2007 that Shri Vinod Surha and Shri Wadia Parkash had ceased to be the directors of the company with effect from 30-9-2006 it was claimed in that application that Shri Vinod Surha and Shri Wadia Prakash were, in fact, confirmed as directors of the company in the AGM held on 30-9-2006 but inadvertently in the minutes of that meeting that fact was not mentioned. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....esence of the petitioner also in that meeting when in fact on that day she was in London. The petitioner has placed on record copy of the minutes of the AGM held on 30-9-2006. Thus, according to the petitioner, the respondents herein in conspiracy with each other had fabricated a document, i.e., minutes dated 30-9-2006 of the AGM in order to use the same in judicial proceedings and had also made false claim relying upon that document that the appointment of Shri Vinod Surha and Shri Wadia Prakash as directors was confirmed in the AGM held on 30-9-2006 and accepting their stand to that effect the Company Law Board passed an order on 31-1-2008 which, as per the petitioner virtually amounted to rejection of her main petition and acceptance of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....even understand the scope of section 340(1) Cr. P.C. and that necessitated invoking the powers vested in this court as the appellate court of Company Law Board since the remedy of action under section 340 Cr. P.C. is the only remedy in respect of offences affecting the administration of justice and civil court has no role to play in this kind of a situation. 8. In view of the fact that the respondents Mr. Vinod Surha and Mr. Wadia Prakash have claimed before the Company Law Board to have been appointed as directors in the AGM which they had held on 30-9-2006 showing the petitioner Sonia Khosla also to be present in that meeting, being the shareholder as well as the director of the company, while her passport shows that she had left India....