TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (10) TMI 675
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting the respondents. Therefore, the respondents were afforded an opportunity to file their objections with regard to the interim reliefs sought in the petition. 2. Shri Arvind P. Datar, learned senior Counsel, while briefly tracing the history of the Company has submitted that the Company was incorporated in the year 1996 converting a partnership firm under the name and style of "S.S.M. Financing Centre" started in the year 1968 with family members of S.S.M. Purushothaman, as partners carrying on the business in the processing of textiles. The authorised capital of the Company is Rs. 4 cores divided into Rs. 4 lakhs equity shares of Rs. 10/- each. The issued, subscribed, paid-up capital of the Company as on 31.03.2002 is Rs. 2,36,81,000....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng of 50,000 shares from Smt. Vijayalakshmi in favour of the third respondent, the equal shareholding maintained between the petitioners' group as well as respondents' group has been adversely affected, prejudicing the interests of the petitioners and therefore, the learned senior Counsel sought for an order of interim injunction restraining the exercise of voting rights in respect of 50,000 equity shares shifted from Smt. Vijayalakshmi to the third respondent, pending disposal of the petition. As the second and third respondents are in the helm of affairs of the Company and exercising exclusive control over the affairs of he Company, the petitioners apprehend manipulation and fabrication of the accounts of the Company by the respon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... returns. According to the learned Counsel, the disputes between the petitioners and the second respondent in relation to the affairs of the Company are the subject matter of the Arbitration Agreement dated 06.10.2001. After taking into consideration the statements of claims and the rejoinders and oral submissions made by the parties and after giving them a full and complete opportunity of being heard, the arbitrators have passed an award dated 28.02.2002. The properties set out in Annexure 'A' of the award comprising of inter-alia the factory land, building and machinery belonging to the Company were allotted in favour of the second respondent and his branch of family. The said award has become final and binding on all the parti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....makrishnan further pointed out that the petitioners have wantonly suppressed the annexures forming part of the award. The petitioners have, therefore, approached the CLB with unclear hands. The remedies claimed by the petitioners being discretionary in nature, the CLB is not bound to grant any relief considering conduct and behaviour of the petitioners. 4. Shri R. Venkatavaradan, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in his reply has submitted that the award passed by the arbitrators is null and void against which the petitioners have taken appropriate steps by preferring an appeal against the order dated 07.10.2003 passed by the Sub-ordinate Judge, Coimbatore. Therefore, the award in question should be ignored by the CLB. Withou....