The court disposed of the company appeal by passing a consent order regarding the holding of an Extra Ordinary General Meeting and agreeing to expedite hearing due to digitalization deadlines.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
COAPPL4.16-7
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
COMPANY APPEAL (L) NO.4 OF 2016 IN CLB/COMPANY PETITION NO.104 OF 2011
Den Nasik City Cable Network Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ….Appellants
V/s.
Milind Dayaram Kapse & Ors. ....Respondents
Mr.Zal Andhyarujina a/w Rahul Dwarkadas & Prachi Dhanani i/by Veritas Legal for the appellants.
Adv.Priya Ranade & Abhay Tikekar i/by S.Venkatesh for the respondent nos.1 to 10.
Adv.Suraj Aiyer i/by Ganesh & Co. for respondent no.11.
CORAM : K.R.SHRIRAM,J DATE : 4.2.2016
P.C.:-
1 After hearing the counsel for the appellant and the counsel
for the respondents for some time, it was suggested by the opposing
counsels that the following consent order be passed :-
ORDER
(c) If the only Resolution in the agenda of EOGM is passed, the company will not act on the Resolution until further orders from Company Law Board ;
(d) The counsels for the appellants and the respondents state that parties will not ask for
KJ
COAPPL4.16-7
2
adjournment on the dates fixed by the Company Law Board ;
(e) Since the dead line for digitalization is in the first week of March-2016, the Company law Board, subject to its convenience, may consider hearing the petition expeditiously ;
2 Shri Andhyarujina states that the sentence in page-3 of the impugned order be expunged- “Accordingly to the applicant all this is being done to achieve an oblique motive..........” In my view, there is no such necessity because the Member has merely recorded the submission of the applicant.
3 Mr.Suraj Aiyer i/by Ganesh & Co. undertakes to file Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent no.11 during the course of today.
4 Accordingly the appeal stands disposed. Company application if any, also accordingly does not survive.
(K.R.SHRIRAM,J)
KJ
COAPPL4.16-7
3
CERTIFICATE
Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed Judgment/Order.
KJ
Den Nasik City Cable Network Pvt. Ltd.
Milind Dayaram Kapse
K.R.SHRIRAM
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
