2012 (5) TMI 227

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....- 2011.) - -<br>Corporate Laws<br>V.G. SABHAHIT AND RAVI MALIMATH, JJ. B.C. Thiruvengadam for the Appellant. C.K. Nanda, A. Murali and Povaiah for the Respondent. JUDGMENT V.G. Sabhahit, J. - This appeal is filed by the applicants in Company Application No. 49/11 in Company Petition No. 46/08 being aggrieved by the order dated 8-4-2011, wherein application filed by the appellants herein s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....4. Having perused the material on record and having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties it is unnecessary to go into the merits having regard to the order that is proposed to be passed by us. 5. It is well-settled that in every application for impleading, it is not mandatory for CLB to issue notice to the proposed respondent. If the application is not maintainable or averments d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....any Law Board dated 8-4-2011 is set aside and Company Application No. 49/11 is restored to the file of Addl. Principal Bench at Chennai (Chennai Bench) filed in Company Petition No. 46/2008 with a direction to dispose of the Company Application No. 49/11 after considering the objections filed by the proposed respondent and contentions of applicant and other respondents. 7. It is made clear that....