GLR REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. AKASH JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant has filed this civil revision under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "CPC") challenging order dtd. 04/10/2024 passed by the 14thDistrict and Sessions Judge, Gwalior in RCSA/627/2024, whereby its application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC has been rejected by the learned Trial Court.

(2.) For convenience, the parties to this revision are referred as plaintiff and defendant in this order per their respective status in the civil suit.

(3.) The plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction inter-alia pleading that defendant No.3 is a registered Pvt. Ltd. company and he is one of the directors of the company having 33.33 % shareholding. It is also pleaded that defendants no.1 and 2 are also the directors of the company and are having 16.66% and 16.67% shareholding respectively. He has further pleaded that one Smt. Shweta Agrawal is having 33.34% shareholding in the company. The plaintiff has further pleaded that the company is the owner of the land details of which are given in paragraph 2 of the plaint. The said land is duly recorded in the name of company. In para 7 of the plaint, it has been pleaded that on 26/05/2024, a meeting was called by defendants no.1 and 2 and a resolution was passed authorizing themselves to sell part of the company's land. The plaintiff has pleaded that no notice of this meeting was given to him and in fact, he was out of country on that day alongwith his family. It has further pleaded that it was a Sunday on 26/05/2024 and, therefore, no meeting could have been legally convened on the said date. He has also pleaded that on the basis of resolution dtd. 26/05/2024, defendants no.1 and 2 have executed sale deed in favour of defendant no.4 (applicant) on 07/06/2024 whereby company's land bearing survey no.246 (0.490 hectare) has been sold. It is his case that no prior information of execution of sale deed was given to him and land has been sold on a very less consideration of Rs.2.61 Crore in order to cause financial loss to the company as also to the plaintiff.