C N SETTY Vs. HILLOCK HOTELS PVT LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) O.S.A. No.40 of 1999 is filed by the respondents in Company Petition No.27 of 1988 and O.S.A. No.5 of 1996 is filed by he petitioner in the Company Petition. The respondents in the Company Petition (Appellants in O.S.A. No.40 of 1999) are aggrieved by the findings of the learned Judge that there was oppressive conduct on the part of the 2nd respondent and his group of shareholders.

(2.) The petitioner in the Company Petition (Appellant in O.S.A.No.5 of 1996) hereinafter referred to as 'petitioner is aggrieved by the quantum of relief granted by the learned single Judge while allowing the Company Petition. It is the contition of the appellant in O.S.A. No.5 of 1996 that the value of the shares which the respondents were called upon to pay to the appellant was very much on the law side and that option should have been given to the petitioner-appellant to buy shares.

(3.) C.P. No.27 of 1988 was filed seeking directions under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act to provide relief to the petitioner against the alleged acts of oppression. The petitioner sought an order to invalidate the issuance of additional shares to respondents 2 to 6 on 24-3-1988, to remove the 2nd respondent and respondents 4 to 6 from the posts of Managing Director and Directors respectively, to direct amendment of Articles of Association so as to have proportionate representation for the petitioner on the one hand and respondents 2 and 3 on the other hand and lastly to allow the petitioner to purchase the shares of respondents 3 to 6 to the value fixed by this Court. Respondents 3 to 6 are the wife and children of the 2nd respondent.