Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

I. PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS:

10. Preliminary objections are raised by the respondents to the maintainability of the appeal on the grounds that (a) as this Court had admitted the appeal only on two questions of law, none of the other questions of law can be examined; (b) the appeal is restricted only to the appellants claims against R-1 to R-8, as they had given up all claims that would affect the other respondents and, except for their claim for rectification of the register of members, all other contentions must be deemed not to have been pressed; and (c) a composite application, under Section 111 and 397 of the Act, cannot be filed before the CLB. It is convenient to examine preliminary objections (a) and (c) at the outset, and objection (b) after adjudicating the contentions urged, by learned counsel on either side, on merits.

(ii) COMPOSITE APPLICATION UNDER SECTIONS 111 AND 397 OF THE ACT:

21. It is contended, on behalf of the respondents, that a composite application under Section 111, read with Sections 397 of the Act, is not maintainable; the relief under Section 111 cannot be, simultaneously, pressed into service along with the relief under Section 397 as the very word "rectification" indicates that the person, seeking rectification, is not a member of the company as on the date of the presenting of a petition before the CLB; and the object of prescribing a 10% share-holding, as a pre-requisite for seeking relief under Section 397, is only to prevent frivolous petitions from being filed before the CLB. It is submitted on behalf of the appellants that the CLB routinely entertains composite petitions under Sections 111 and 397 of the Act; filing of such composite petitions was examined by the Delhi High Court in Charanjit Khanna v. Khanna Paper Mills Ltd.8; and Section 111 does not prescribe any minimum shareholding.