Karnataka High Court
Smt. S Kunjithamala vs M/S Hvac Systems Pvt Limited on 29 August, 2011
Author: A.S.Bopanna
Bench: A.S.Bopanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 297™ DAY OF AUGUST, 2011 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AS BOPANNA™ 0 BETWEEN: I. Smit. S. Kuntithamala W/o late Sri Ramaroorthi Aged 45 years. 2. R.A, Preethi Aged 20 years. 3. Master R. Prashanth. Aged 17 vears 8 Minior rep. by his mother _ and natural guardian _ petitioner-No. | herein -- swap All are R/a C/ oO HVAC, Systems Pvt. Ltd., No. 145. 20¢ Maing is '6 Cross gn¢ Phase, Domlur Bangalore 560 O71 -- ... Petitioners (By Sri Rajeswara,P.N., Adv) HVAC Systems Pvt. Limited gistered Office al Bangalore Karnataka with Regn. No.16023/94 "Rep. by ils Mg. Director No. 145, 20¢ Main. 19' Cross ane Phase, Dombur Bangalore ~ 560 O71. . reve * ' (ohm Bo L. Vivekanarida S/o Ramakrishnappa Age 39 years Ria No. 7S, 1% Cross 3" Main, Defence Colony Indiranagar, Bangalore ~ S60 008. GS. ING Vysya Bank Corporate Olfice M._G. Road, Bangalore ~ 560 001 .- By its Manager. . _ Respondents - (By Sri R Nataraj. Adv. for R2 RS- Served & Urire presented). These writ petitions are Hied.u inder AUC les 226 ke Det of the Constitution of India. with a prayer to quash the orders dated 04.05.2011 and 06.07.2011 ino CP. No.41 /2005 passed by the Hon'ble Company Law Board, Additional Princ ipal' Bench, 'Cherinai.vide Annexures-A & B and ete., Ba These Writ' "pet ilions . coming © on for preliminary hearing, this.day. the © POUT, made the following : & The petiti igners: are Be fore this Court assailing the 7 orders. . dated »94-08:20 li and 06.07.2011 passed in > P.No O.4 | p 20 JE. 3. Dy the Cormpany Law Board. which are impugned at -Atinexures-A and B. The petitioners have -Salso sought for issue of mandamus to direct the "Conipany Law Board to consider their affidavit dated 04.05.2011. os .
ears .
.
.
Lad
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, | am of the opinion that the instant petitions He in a narrow compass and the same could be disposed. arid for consideration of the matter by the Company Law Board. In this regard, it is to be noticea. that Me ~ petitioners are before this Court only with a grievance that the case before the. Company' Law Board is. to be considered after the Chartered : Accountant Sri CLR. Murali submits the audit re port in. compliance of the earlier orders: passed by uh - . Company Law Board. [i is in that content, the petitioners lairh to be aggrieved by the impugned orders witereby, the Company Law Board Q | the audit report from the . Chartered. Accountant thas proceeded to hold that the rater is to he considered in the absence of the same, but by hearing on the valuation report. Considering the bey course the -petition pending before the Company Law = Board "has taken and since there was delay in conclusion of the proceedings, at the outset, no fault could be found with the Company Law Board in arriving Pyle ge ss = i...
at such a conclusion, but at the same time, the interest of the parties to have proper adjudication also should be kept in view.
3. Therefore, what cannot also be lost sight is that when the matter is ultimately heard by" the . Company Law Board, all the parties ; should. | have sufficient opportunity and thereatter the Company Law Board should arrive at a corclusion cite way or the other in accordance with Jaw. Only 66 'the said extent, the impugned . ordet's are modified hoiding that the Company Law, Board shalt now ensure that the Chartered Accountant Sri-CoR. Murali submits the audit report withiit.a period. of . ewo . months from the date of furnishing o) certified copy of this order before the "Compan ¥ 'Law Board, Thereafter, the Company Law Board shail 'proweed to consider the matter by hearing the parties.on all aspects including the audit report that ~ would'be submitted by the Chartered Accountant. 4A, Further. if is stated that all docurnenis of the report by the Chartered Accountant have already been submitted to the Chartered Accountant and therefore, appropriate direction may be issued by the. Company Law Board to the Chartered Accountant:.by"-- fixing a ti Chartered Accountant shall also comply with the directions, © Thereafter, the Company Law Board shall consider and dispose of the matter expeditionsly, oS Considering the delay, the Company Law Board sha tt Set a timeframe for itself to dispose of the matter, at the latest by three months from the 'date jn . which: ; he au dit report is submitted. ~ In. that -cireumst anced, the intent of the Company' Law Board. to. proceed with the matter based only on the valuation report is not sustainabie.
"With. the aborc clarification and direction, the petitions stands disposed of, with no order as to costs.
-arp/bms u