UNION OF INDIA Vs. TECH MAHINDRA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE Company Appeals arise out of order, dated 16.10.2012, in Company Application Nos.233 and 234/621A/CB/2010 of the Company Law Board, Chennai Bench, Chennai.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, leading to the filing of these Company Appeals are stated hereunder:

(3.) IT needs to be mentioned at this stage the reasons that prompted this Court to remand the cases. It was pleaded on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 before this Court that respondent No.1 -company was made a victim of the fraud played by its Directors; that following the fraud of a great magnitude indulged in by the then Chairman, Managing Director and other Directors of the Company, a fresh life was infused into the company by the new Management, viz., M/s Tech -Mahindra; and that the Company itself, even before it was reconstituted after its taking over, was not an accused in the criminal cases involving the fraud by its Directors (hereinafter referred to as main cases investigated by the CBI). It was further pleaded that the CBI, after investigation, found absolutely no role whatsoever by respondent No.2 -the Company Secretary (accused No.4), which fact was informed by the CBI to the new Management of the Company, vide its letter, dated 27.08.2010 and that besides giving a clean chit to respondent No.2 -accused No.4, the CBI has cited him as a prosecution witness in the main cases, as evident from letter, dated 7/11 -7 -2011, addressed to the Chairman of the Company.