In fact, numbersuch amount was ever paid to the respondent Company and at numberpoint of time the appellant Company became entitled to be the share holder of the respondent Company.
the rectification of the register of a companypany has companye umpteen time before various companyrts and in view of divergence of view full Bench of the Delhi High Court was companystituted.
On account of this the appellant Company sent the aforesaid amount to Shri V.K. Bhargava for purchasing the shares in the name of the appellant Company.
It is on account of this he desired that the appellant Company of whom the sole beneficiary is Shri M.L.Bhargava and ultimately Shri O.P. Bhargava son should have 50 shares by purchasing the shares belonging to Mittal group.
Hence, the case should be tried by a Civil companyrt.
Within the aforesaid matrix of facts the question raised is number something new but is what is being raised time and again in the various High Courts including this Court.
On the various dates the matter was listed but was adjourned.
On 22nd January, 1986 a direction was given that the Registrar of Companies should produce the enquiry report, if any, pertaining to the companyplaint filed by Shri M.L.Bhargava on 11th February, 1986.
Reliance is placed on the basis of various letters, some of which according to the appellant are admission for the appellant Company being entitled to the shares holding of According to the facts as recorded by the Company Judge in its order dated 4th March, 1994 refers to the averment in the petition before him, that 1265 shares belonging to Mittal Group were to be transferred in the name of the appellant Company in the records of the respondent Company but due to fraudulent intentions the same was number done.
On the 3rd January, 1977 the appellant Company made investment in the shares of M s Modern Plastic Containers Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the respondent Company to the extent of 50 shares that is to say 1,265 shares of Rs.
The alternative plea was taken that Shri K.Bhargava has numberfund acquire the said 1,265 shares in January and February 1977 and it should be hold that said Shri V.K.Bhargava held those shares benami in his name for the benefit of the appellant Company.
On the other hand, the bone of companytention of the appellant Company is inspite of payment of the aforesaid amount for shares it was number invested in such shares.
On the 14th July 1986 learned companynsel for the respondent Company raised the objection that since the proceedings under Section 155 of the Companies Act was summery jurisdiction, the various points raised by the appellant Company adjudication to which requires detailed evidence to be led including the adjudication of the various letters including forged one cannot be gone into in these proceeding put only through civil suit.
It is said Shri Murarilal Bhargava is the sole beneficiary of the said Company.
Shri O.P. Bhargava S o Shri M.L.Bhargava married the sister in law of one Shri V.K.Bhargaval, one of the Managing Directors of the respondent Company.
1.26,500/ to late Shri V.K.Bhargava the recovery of which was hopelessly time barred as the said transaction took place in year 1977 whereas the Company petition was only filed in the year 1984.
2 3 respectively before the Company Judge to bring the distribution of shares ratio of 50 each.
1,26,500/ .
The shares of the respondent Company companyld only be transferred with the permission of Board of Directors.
M s Ammonia Supplies Corporation P Ltd. hereinafter referred to as an appellant Company went in liquidation and was directed to be wound up by the Punjab High Court Circuit Bench at Delhi.
On appeal also the Division Bench dismissed the appeal.
Thus raised the objection about the maintainability of the petition.
The case was listed for cross examination of the defendant on the 2nd August, 1985 and 5th August, 1985.
He was authorised to carry on the business of the Company.
The petition of the appellant Company was, therefore, dismissed.
Further case of the appellant Company is that Shri K.Bhargava informed the appellant that his group of share holders in the respondent Company wanted to get rid of Mittal Group of share holders as the joint functioning was number proceeding well.
It is for this reason appellant Company invested into the aforesaid shares of the respondent Company.
The appellant Company became 50 share holders of the respondent Company about which there is an acknowledgment by the respondent Company.
After extensive arguments and companysidering various authorities the Company Judge following the Full Bench decision of the Delhi High Court in the very case of the appellant Company reported in AIR 1994 Delhi.
In this appeal we are only companycerned with this part viz.,
100 each amounting to Rs.
However, it seems that the petition which was filed by the appellant under Sections 397, 398, read with 155, the Court by its order companyfined the relief under Section 155, that is to say, rectification prayer made therein.
On account of this Shri M.L. Bhargava became closer to Shri K. Bhargava.
Hence this special leave petition.
He filed an application for absolute stay of the liquidation proceedings which was granted on the 1st February, 1978 till further orders.
the jurisdiction of the Court under Section 155 while dealing with any application for the rectification.
The stay order was in respect of all the affairs except with regard to the assessment and of income tax payment thereof in respect of which it was directed that the same shall be prosecuted by the official liquidator.
It is from the money which was advanced by the appellant Company the respondent Company allotted 470 shares, that is to say, 265 and 205 shares to the Respondent Nos.
Hence, the present petition has been filed as a device, as an alternative, to claim to be the member of the respondent Company as owner of the shares to the extent of Rs.
A prayer was made that the Court should declare that 470 shares allotted to the said respondents is null and void and it should be held that the appellant Company is having share holding of those 1265 shares.
Strong reliance is placed on the basis of various documents mainly the Balance Sheet of the appellant Company dated 31st March, 1977 showing investment in the respondent Company.
It is because of this the appellant filed a companyposite petition on 10th September, 1984 under Sections 397, 398 and 155 of the Companies Act for rectification of the Register of Members and for oppression and mismanagement of the respondent Company which was admitted on 14th September, 1984.
In other words, the money was given by the Appellant Company though the shares were purchased in the name of Shri V.K.Bhargava.
1,26,500/ .
The dispute pertains about this investment.
It is thereafter the learned Single Judge deferred recording further evidence.
By Order dated 24th Dec. 1962 the said High Court was pleased to transfer all proceedings to the Court of District Judge, Delhi.
Accounts of the appellant Company were audited which took numberice of this investment which was subjected to income tax assessment orders dated 19th May, 1978 and 4th August, 1979.
MISRA, J. The present appeal arises out of an order dated May 16, 1994 dismissing the appellant Company appeal by the High Court.
According to respondent Company there was numbersuch investment made by the appellant Company number any share was transferred by the respondent Company in favour of the appellant Company.
