NANDKISHOR SHANKAR KAMTHE Vs. HINDUSTAN SUGARS LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order governs CA No. 74/2013 filed by the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 18 to 33 and 36 to 39 under regulation 44 of the Company Law Board Regulations, 1991 ('CLB Regulations') for dismissal of the Company Petition No. 1 of 2013 for want of jurisdiction. Following facts are not disputed:

(2.) THE applicants/respondents contend that a composite petition under sections 247 and 250 and section 237 of the Act is not maintainable. The stand taken by Shri Ramesh Singh, counsel appearing for the applicants/respondents is that a petition under section 247/250 can be filed "only in the course of any proceeding pending before the CLB". No such proceedings were pending either before the Mumbai Bench or the Principal Bench on the date of filing of petition CP No. 1 of 2013. It was contended that the petitioners have filed the CP No. 70 of 2013 much later in June 2013 under sections 397, 398, 402, 403, 406, 408 and 111A of the Act before the Mumbai Bench of the CLB. Reliance is placed on Uniworth Textiles Ltd. v. Asset Reconstruction Co. (India) Ltd. : (2013) 112 CLA 593 (Cal.) : (2012) 175 CompCas 418 and the order dated 26th October, 2012 passed by me in Mansingka Industries Ltd. (CP No. 3 of 2012), wherein it was observed that the following points are discernible from the decision in Uniworth Textiles Ltd. (supra):