Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: section 634a in E.Bapanaiah vs K.S.Raju Etc on 7 November, 2014Matching Fragments
20. When an application under Section 634A of the Companies Act, 1956 was moved by the present appellant before the CLB, the Board, by speaking order dated 21.8.2001, after considering rival submissions, observed in paragraphs 6 and 7 as under: -
“6. In regard to the plea of Shri Murali that the provisions of Section 634A cannot be invoked by the applicant, it may be observed that this Section is explicit which runs as follows:
Sec. 634A: Any order made by the Company Law Board may be enforced by that Board in the same manner as if it were a decree made by a Court in a suit pending therein, and it shall be lawful for that Board to send, in the case of its inability to execute such order, to the Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction, -
a) in the case of an order against a company, the registered office of the company is situated, or
b) in the case of an order against any other person, the person concerned voluntarily resides, or carries on business or personally works for gain.
Section 634A is clear that as in the case of a court, the orders of the Company Law Board can be enforced by it in the same manner as if it were a decree made by a court. This section further permits the CLB, in case of its liability to execute the order, to seek the assistance of the court having competent jurisdiction for execution of its order. In view of this there is no force in the argument of Shri Murali.
Coming to the second submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent company, though I do not propose to go into the larger question whether the nature of the power exercised under Section 634A of the Companies Act is in the nature of the power exercised as an executing court, but I must say the impugned order is not in conformity with the original order of the Company Law Board dated 29th February, 2000. But, a combined reading of clause 1(i) and 12(iv) of the scheme, the respondent company is bound to pay 30% of the amount due to the petitioner within 1 year from the date of the maturity (28.4.2001) spread over 12 equal monthly instalments.
22. However, after above order was passed by the High Court, a proviso is added by Legislature to Section 634A of the Companies Act, 1956, which reads as under:-
“Provided that the provision of this section shall not apply on and after commencement of the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002.” As such, on the date (3.8.2007) order passed by learned single Judge, the depositor had no option of getting executed the order of CLB as a decree passed in a suit, and present appellant could not have been asked to avail remedy under Section 634A of the Companies Act.