TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (5) TMI 619
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of the Central Government under Section 399(4) of the Act to file this petition. A copy of the authorisation is enclosed with the petition as annexure-20. Originally when the petition was heard on January 27, 1998, the petitioner sought certain interim reliefs, ex parte. With a view to hear the respondents, the matter was posted to February 17, 1998, when the respondents were represented by one Shri Naroop, advocate when he made a statement that the company would give inspection of the books of account to the petitioner as prayed for at para. B at page 12 of the petition and as such we did not pass any order on the other interim reliefs sought other than recording the undertaking by counsel for the respondents to give inspection of record....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the respondents to enable them to file their replies and posted this application along with the petition for consideration on December 14, 1998. We also directed that a copy of the order containing the directions should be served on the respondents by the petitioner. On December 14, 1998, when the matter was taken up for consideration, it was noted that none from the respondents' side was present even though it was stated by counsel for the petitioner that our earlier order indicating the date of hearing today was served on all the respondents. It was noticed that no reply has been filed by the respondents on the petition and it was also seen that the Bench officer has also sent notices to the respondents about the date of hearing on De....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... it has over 48,000 shareholders of which nearly 4,000 of them being NRIs. It appears that the company is a part of Richimen group of companies having a few other public limited companies in the group. It appears as a part of mobilising funds, the second respondent induced a number of NRIs to subscribe to the share capital of the company by giving a rosy picture about the prospects of investment in the company and the petitioner has contributed Rs. 54.4 lakhs for 5.45 lakhs equity shares of Rs. 10 each in 1986. It also appears that after mobilising funds, the respondent-company completely neglected the petitioner by not sending annual reports, etc., which a shareholder is entitled to get. It is seen from the petition that all attempts made ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e deposits, loans and advances running into lakhs of rupees. Discrepancies in the share capital account. A huge outstanding of Rs. 1.88 crores as calls in arrears out of the total issued capital of Rs. 10 crores. Doubtful nature of local sales and supply of samples contributing nearly 80 per cent, of the total production of the company. Non-maintenance of various statutory registers. Non-holding of general body meetings after December 20, 1993, and non-presentation of audited accounts before the annual general meeting. Under utilisation of the capacity which works out to roughly 10 per cent, of the installed capacity. As we have already observed, the company is a listed company having a large number of shareholders. The....