Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

40. In the counter-affidavit, the Corporation has taken a different stand. Attempts have been made to place the responsibility for every wrong thing in the matter on the managing director and, contrary to what had been stated by the auditors or by the chairman in their respective reports, allegations have been made against him. So far as the period covered by the reports is concerned, I am not prepared to accept the changed version reflected in the counter-affidavit. On the other hand, the allegations made by the petitioner seem to be true as they are in accord with the undisputed material. The Corporation persuaded the company not to make the calls and at one time had clearly indicated that it was undergoing financial strain and was not in a position to meet the demand of calls if made then. The interests of the company were not kept in view and the Corporation was anxious to maintain its own position even at the cost of the company. If the money had been paid in good time, it is reasonable to conclude that there would not have been a set back in the installation of the machinery and the initial target for going into production may not have been disturbed. Again, the Corporation at one stage was anxious to unload its shares and had even requested the managing director of the company to arrange for their disposal. Though I am prepared to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the Corporation that no distinction in law exists in regard to the rights of a shareholder and holder of shares under an underwriting agreement, there is scope to accept the contention of the petitioner's counsel that the shares in this case had been taken with a view to extending a helping hand and the true intention was that the shares would be unloaded in due course. The several correspondences on the point do support the petitioner's contention. I may refer only to three documents to support my conclusion on this score. On April 11, 1973, the Corporation's managing director (company chairman) wrote to the company's managing director (vide annexure M/a, at page 344 of the paper book-II):