AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (7) TMI 1195
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bstantial issue in the civil suit in O.S. No. 10 of 2005 and or in the alternative permanently stay the company petition till the disposal of the civil suit pending before the Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar at Srivilliputhur. Shri R. Sankaranarayanan, learned counsel appeared on behalf of the applicant submitted that the second respondent herein is the petitioner in the above company petition filed under sections 397 and 398 of the Act alleging various acts of oppression and mismanagement in the affairs of the first respondent-company and it is pending before this Bench. It is submitted that the second respondent herein made the following prayers in the said company petition: Directing the company to issue share certificates in respect of 1,25,000 equity shares issued and allotted to the petitioner and in respect of 100 preference shares issued by the company. Directing that the 50 per cent. share in the land, building and machinery situated at No. 113, T.P. Mills Road, Cotton Market, Post Box No. 117, Rajapalayam-626 117 be divided in such manner as may be determined by an expert appointed for this purpose and be vested in the se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urt . . . The Company Law Board is not a civil court and this court is not sitting as an appellate court over the order of the Company Law Board and in such case, it would be unwarranted to give any final decision on that issue which is required to be decided by a competent civil court. 3. It is respectfully submitted that the civil suits referred to by the hon'ble High Court in its order dated October 11, 2006, deal with not only the properties and shares of M/s. Shree Bhaarathi Cotton Mills P. Ltd., but also the properties and shares of the first respondent-company herein. The applicant craves leave of this hon'ble Bench to treat the order dated October 11, 2006 and the copies of the civil suits in O.S. No. 10 of 2005 filed by the applicant herein before the Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur to form part and parcel of this application. 4. It is respectfully submitted that the applicant herein, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs before the civil court in O.S. No. 10 of 2005: (a) To declare that the gift deeds registered on October 24, 2002 Reg. No. 3471/02, October 24, 2002 Reg. No.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... first, second respondents herein, besides the preference shareholders of the company are parties before the civil court and the issues before the civil court pertain to partition of properties which includes the movable and immovable assets and the shares of the first respondent-company herein. It is also submitted that the issues raised in the main petition are also substantial issue in the civil suit previously instituted and it clearly falls within the scope of section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Therefore, the petition which is filed subsequent to the suit already filed, has to be stayed till the disposal of the said suit by the civil court. In support of his case, learned counsel relied upon the following decisions: (i) C.A. No. 248 of 2007 in C.P. No. 100 of 2007, dated November 1, 2008 (CLB, Chennai) in the matter of (Shailesh Kumar v. Victor Bruzo), paragraph 9. (ii) [2010] 155 Comp Cas 572(CLB) in the matter of (Akshaya Textiles Ltd. v. S. Martin), paragraph 11. (iii) [2005] 127 CC 687 (CLB) in the matter of (Laxmi Narayan Rawat v. R.T. Udyog P. Ltd.), paragraph 8. (iv) [2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hich this hon'ble Board has exclusive jurisdiction. It is further submitted that the reliefs in the suit relate to the partition and separate possession of certain properties. While one such properties may include the shares belonging to this respondent in the first respondent-company, it is incomprehensible as to how such a suit could in any manner impact or relate to the administration and management of the first respondent-company, which has been deadlocked and in respect of which reliefs have been sought in the petition with a view to resolve such deadlock. It is pertinent to point out that even as set out in the application, the reliefs in the above petition relate to the immovable property of the company and the manner of separation thereof and not merely to the shares of the company. Even so, the reliefs sought for are for the purposes of resolving the deadlock. It is further submitted that this hon'ble Board is not confined to the reliefs sought for in the petition and the settled position is that this hon'ble Board has the power to grant whatever reliefs it deems fit in order to put an end to the oppression complained of and is not necessarily confined to the r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pondent herein filed the above company petition under sections 397 and 398 of the Act by arraying the company, i.e., M/s. Jayabharath Textiles P. Ltd., as the first respondent and the applicant herein as the second respondent. In the company petition various averments have been made by the second respondent herein against the applicant. Amongst other things, it is mentioned at paragraph 7 of the company petition that "the second respondent addressed abusive and totally unconscionable letters to the petitioner, regardless of the fact that the petitioner was his father and was in advanced age. The second respondent (applicant herein) also purported to file a suit for challenging the partition entered into by him with the petitioner. The filing of the suit has created a further acrimony between the petitioner and the second respondent leading to a complete breakdown of their relationship". The second respondent herein has narrated various instances with regard to the deadlock and detriment caused to the first respondent-company at the behest of the applicant herein in the company petition. It is pertinent to mention the relevant averment to this issue as made at paragraph 17 of the co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,318 owed by the first respondent-company to the said Shree Bhaarathi Cotton Mills P. Ltd. (5) To declare the redemption of preference shares as invalid. (6) Pass such further order as this hon'ble Board may deed fit and proper to grant relief from the acts complained of. 12. From the above reliefs as sought by the second respondent (petitioner), it is crystal clear that the second respondent is seeking directions to the company and the applicant herein to issue share certificates in respect of 1,25,000 shares and divide the 50 per cent. share in the land, building and machinery of the first respondent and direct the applicant to transfer his entire shareholding in respect of respondent No. 1 company to the second respondent herein. Per contra, the applicant contended that he filed civil suit being O. S. No. 10 of 2005 before the Principal District Judge, Virudhunagar District, Srivilliputhur, inter alia, in respect of the shares and the property of the first respondent-company also. From the perusal of the plaint in O.S. No. 10 of 2005 it is evident that the applicant arrayed the second respondent herein as the first defendant in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to 5 therein on the view that the properties dealt therein are the second respondent's self acquired properties and therefore the contention of the second respondent (petitioner) that he is entitled to gift away those properties by way of gifts. In view of the facts and figures as made in the plaint, the applicant prayed the civil court to pass judgment and decree in his favour. The prayers which are sought before the civil court are as follows: (a) To declare that the gift deeds registered on October 24, 2002, Reg. No. 3471/02, October 24, 2002, Reg. No. 3472/02, December 12, 2002, Reg. No. 4079/02, registered on February 26, 2004, Reg. No. 784/04, executed by the first defendant in favour of defendants Nos. 2 to 5 are null and void and will not bind the plaintiffs share in the suit property. (b) To partition plaintiffs half share in plaint A schedule properties by metes and bounds and put the plaintiff in possession of his half share. (c) Direct the defendants to pay costs of this suit, and (d) For such other relief or reliefs as this hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the circum....