Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Shankar Sundaram vs Amalgamations Ltd.. on 13 January, 2015
Bench: Anil R. Dave, Kurian Joseph, Shiva Kirti Singh
ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.3 SECTION XII
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.10532-10533/2012
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 07/09/2011
in LPA No.129 & 131 of 2002 passed by the High Court Of Madras)
SHANKAR SUNDARAM Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
AMALGAMATIONS LTD.& ORS. Respondent(s)
(With interim relief and office report)
(For final disposal)
Date : 13/01/2015 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVA KIRTI SINGH
For Petitioner(s) Mr. K. Ravi,Adv.
Mr. K.K. Mani,Adv.
Mr. R. Murugan,Adv.
Ms. T. Archana,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Anil B. Divan,Sr.Adv.
Mr. Shyam Divan,Sr.Adv.
Mr. Krishna Srinivasan,Adv.
Mr. P. Dwarakesh,Adv.
Mr. S. Sukumaran,Adv.
Ms. Geethi Ara,Adv.
Mr. Anand Sukumar,Adv.
Mr. Bhupesh Kumar Pathak,Adv.
For Ms. Meera Mathur,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
We have heard the learned counsel and perused the order dated 18th October, 2000, passed by the Company Law Board, Principal Bench, New Delhi, and more particularly, Signature Not Verified paragraph 41 thereof, which reads as under :
Digitally signed by Sarita Purohit Date: 2015.01.28 16:32:13 ISTReason: “In view of the foregoing we direct as follows : The names of all the subsidiaries and their directors be deleted from the array 1 of parties. The 1st respondent company, which had reserved its right to file a detailed reply, will file its reply on the allegations in the petition including those in respect of its dealing with the subsidiaries, by 1.12.2000. The petitioner will file his rejoinder by 31.12.2000. The petition will be heard on 11 th and 12 th January, 2001, at 10.15 a.m. on both the days” We have been informed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that in pursuance of the said order, reply has already been filed by Respondent No.1, though the said fact has been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. If the reply has not been filed, it shall be filed within four weeks from today and a copy thereof shall be supplied to the petitioners. If the reply has already been filed but the copy is not given to the other side, it shall be supplied to the other side within a week from today. Rejoinder affidavit shall also be filed by the petitioners within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the reply.
Liberty to file annexures, if need be.
The Company Law Board shall proceed further with the matter.
We hope that the Company Law Board shall expedite the hearing and shall try to conclude the case preferably within six months from the date of receipt of this order.
It has also been submitted that the petitioners have filed CP No.20 of 2012 before the Company Law Board. The said petition shall also be heard along with C.P.No.94 of 1999. The direction with regard to filing of reply shall be limited only to the holding companies at this stage, so far as CP No.20 of 2012 is concerned. Reply shall be given by Respondent No.1, i.e., the holding company and the subsidiary company need not file their reply or participate in the proceedings at this stage 2 List the matters on 1st September, 2015., so as to know the progress.
(Sarita Purohit) (Sneh Bala Mehra)
Court Master Assistant Registrar
3