2015 (12) TMI 1808

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....idation) had borrowed loan of Rs. 9 Crores for expanding its business and substantial portion of shares held by applicant and family members are said to have been taken by zero cost with an understanding that entire assets and liabilities of company are taken over by Sri. S.N. Ladhani, resident of Bengaluru and therefore shareholding was diluted to less than 2% and remaining shares were held by Sri. Ladhani and his nominees. In addition, it is stated that State Bank of India had extended an additional loan of Rs. 2 Crores against security of company's assets during the year 2007 and when Sri. S.N. Ladhani and his nominees proposed to manage the company bank accepted their guarantee and thereby there is 'act of novation' and as s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he has no shareholding in the company and he had voluntarily exited from the company in the year 2006 itself when he transferred his shareholding in favour of Sri. S.N. Ladhani and his family members and as such he cannot have any say in the matter. It has been further held by Division Bench that when a pointed question was posed to the learned counsel appearing for appellant therein (who incidentally happens to be same counsel in the present application) to the effect as to right of appellant to seek revival of company (not being a shareholder) was not answered to arrive at a conclusion that appellant therein i.e., applicant herein has not been able to explain as to why after having woken up from his slumber in the year 2013 i.e., nearly f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....led to agitate his claim for being impleaded in the present proceedings despite his application to come on record being dismissed earlier and affirmed by Division Bench. By no stretch of imagination liberty given by Division Bench can be construed as one permitting the applicant to re-agitate the matter which has reached finality. In that view of the matter the citations relied upon by learned counsel appearing for applicant which are as under: "1. AIR 2010 SC 3109 -Mumbai International Airport Pvt. Ltd. v. Regency Convention Centre and Hotels Pvt. Ltd., and ors. 2. (1979) 3 SCC 54 - S.K. Gupta and another v. K.P. Jain and another. 3. Civil Appeal No. 3803/2014 - Phatu Rochiram Mulchandani v. Karnataka Industrial ....