Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.28 seconds)Section 398 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Sangramsinh P. Gaekwad & Ors vs Shantadevi P. Gaekwad (Dead)Thr.Lrs. & ... on 20 January, 2005
The grievances against OARC following from the JV Agreement must be agitated in a civil proceeding but not in a proceeding under Section 397 as laid down by the Apex Court in Sangramsinh P.Gaekwad and Ors. v. Shantadevi P. Gaekwad (supra). It is observed that the petitioners have already referred the disputes to arbitration, which include the loss of Rs. 740 crores reportedly suffered by the Company on account of non fulfilment of the terms of JVA, wherein OARC is also a party to the said proceedings. The CLB, in my considered view, is not the appropriate forum to enforce the contractual obligations in terms of the J V Agreement against OARC and it would not constitute oppression in the affairs of the Company. For these reasons, the prayer for impleadment of OARC does not satisfy the legal proposition enunciated in the various decisions cited supra and therefore, the application is liable to be dismissed. Ordered accordingly.
Section 542 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 44 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
The State Of Madras, Presented By The ... vs M. Ramakrishna Naidu (Died) And Ors. on 12 April, 1957
• OARC is neither a proper nor necessary party. The essential tests to decide whether a person is a necessary party are laid down by the Supreme Court in Deputy Commissioner v. Ramakrishna Nair .
Section 402 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 403 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Ramesh Hiranand Kundanmal vs Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... on 4 March, 1992
• The prayer for surcharging OARC in terms of the JV agreement can be enforced only when OARC is made a party to the present proceedings. OARC's presence is necessary for a complete and final decision on the question involved in the present proceedings and without which, no effective order can be made, especially when OARC is directly interested in the subject matter of the litigation. These are the essential requirements for impleadment of a party as laid down by the apex court in Hirachand Kundanmal v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay , which has been followed by this Board inA.