BHARAT BHUSHAN NARANG Vs. SUDERSHAN KUMAR MANCHANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Srinivas Raghavan V., Learned senior counsel Mr.Pradeep Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Aditya Sondhi, learned Senior counsel for Mr.Nischal Dev., learned counsel for caveator/respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner inter alia seeks a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 03.07.2019 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short).

(2.) Facts giving rise to the filing of the petition briefly stated are that on 03.08.2012 respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed a company petition before the Company Law Board, Chennai under Sections 111, 397 and 398 read with Sections 402 and 406 of the Companies Act, 1956 against the acts of oppression and mismanagement in the respondent No.4-Company. The respondent Nos.1 to 3 inter alia sought a declaration that transfer of 500 shares belonging to them in respondent No.4-Company was malafide and illegal. The petitioner and respondent No.4 on 05.05.2014 filed statement of objections before the Company Law Board. Thereafter, on 10.06.2013, respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed their statement of rejoinder before the Company Law Board. During the course of the proceedings respondent No.4 filed C.A.No.1/2013, by which preliminary objection with regard to limitation and maintainability of company petition was raised. The statement of objections was filed to the aforesaid interlocutory application by respondent Nos.1 to 3.

(3.) The Company Law Board after hearing both the parties, in C.A.No.1/2013 by an order dated 10.02.2016 observed that it involves question of facts and therefore, C.A.No.1/2013 was directed to be listed for hearing along with company petition for arguments on 23.03.2016. On account of constitution of National Company Law Tribunal on 01.06.2016, the proceedings in company petition were transferred from Company Law Board to National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru. The Tribunal heard the counsel for the parties on C.A.No.1/2013 but, recorded a finding that both the counsels were heard on the main matter as well. Being aggrieved, respondent Nos.1 to 3 filed W.P.No.1947/2017. The aforesaid writ petition was disposed of by this Court by an order dated 06.03.2019, by which the order of the Tribunal dated 16.12.2016 was set aside and the Tribunal was directed to hear the parties afresh and all the issues were kept open to the parties to be agitated during the hearing of the company petition. The Tribunal was directed to make an endeavour to dispose of the company petition within six months.