(1.) Petitioners in C.P. No. 78 of 2012 before the Company Law Board, Chennai, have filed this appeal under Section 10(F) of the Companies Act, 1956, against the impugned order of the Company Law Board dated 05.06.2013 dismissing C.P. No. 78 of 2012 and allowing C.A. No. 1 of 2013 filed by the respondents. Stated briefly, while the aforesaid company petition was filed by the appellant under Sections 397, 398, 402 and 406 of the Companies Act, 1956 (for short "the Act'), the respondents herein filed C.A. No. 1 of 2013 praying the Company Law Board (for short 'CLB') to refer the patties under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'Arbitration Act') for determination of dispute under the Arbitration Act. The CLB, having allowed the said C.A. No. 1 of 2013, as a consequence dismissed C.P. No. 78 of 2012 summarily. Petitioners in C.P. No. 78 of 2012, therefore, challenge the impugned order on the principal contention that statutory remedy against oppression and mismanagement can be adjudicated only by CLB in terms of the Act and not by an Arbitrator.
(2.) Brief facts are as under:
(3.) By order dated 31.07.2013, while issuing notice to the respondents in this appeal, this Court continued the interim order passed by the CLB dated 13.09.2012, referred to above, for a period of eight weeks and the said order is being extended from time to time pending this appeal.