Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. However, Shri Sarkar submitted that with a view to buy peace, the foreign shareholders are willing to purchase the shares held by the petitioner either on a valuation to be made on the basis of the balance sheet as on 31.3.2004 when the company was under the management control of the petitioner or for a consolidated consideration of 60000 Pounds which according to the petitioner was offered to him earlier, provided the petitioner withdraws the civil suit and all other criminal complaints.

5. Shri Sahijpal, Advocate for the petitioner submitted. Since the respondents have elected not to file any reply, it should be presumed that they have admitted the allegations made in the petition and as such the reliefs sought should be granted. The petitioner can continue as a director as long he can lawfully. His removal is not in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act. The EOGM was not legally held since the proxy holders had not been authorized by the shareholders and the shareholder's signatures had been forged. Even convening the EOGM is not in accordance with law. In terms of the employment letter dated 19.7.1999, the termination could be only "for cause". No cause has been shown. When the respondents have indulged in forgery and have fabricated documents, it is the duty of this Board to safeguard the interests of the company and the shareholders by granting the reliefs sought for. As far as the offer of Shri Sarkar to purchase the shares on the petitioner is concerned, the counsel submitted that the petitioner is not willing to withdraw either the civil suit or the criminal complaints and that if he accepts the offer, the same would be limited only to the present petition.