SCA/ZLL3/2004 Appln. No. 0/41316/2005 Ord. Date 21/11/2005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2113 OF 2004
BANK OF BARODA – Petitioner (s)
Versus
REGISTRAR OF THE COMPANIES GUJARAT & 5 – Respondent (s)
Appearance:
MR. INDRAVADAN PARMAR for Petitioner(s) : 1-Bank of Baroda,
RULE SERVED BY DS FOR Respondent(s) : 1,4 – 5
MR. JITENDRA MALKAN for Respondent(s) : 1-2
MS PJ DAVAWALA for Respondent(s) : 2,
MR. RAJENDRA K GOLANI for Respondent(s) : 3,
SINGHI & CO for Respondent(s) : 4,6
CORAM : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. SHAH
Date : 21/11/2005
ORAL ORDER
1. In pursuance of the order passed by this court dated 15.11.2005, the Registrar of Companies is personally present before this court today for compliance of the order. Presence of Registrar of Companies is taken note of.
2. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner – Bank of Baroda has prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and / or order directing the respondent No. 1 to act upon the communication No. BAR/ADV/93/743 dated 27.10.2001 of the petitioner sent to the respondent No. 1 and further commanding the respondent No. 1 to file a complaint in the court of learned J.M.F.C. at Baroda under Section – 621 read with Section-628 of the Companies Act, 1956 against the respondent No. 3 (M/s. Vision Organics Ltd.) and its two directors, namely – Mr. Jatin Hiralal Shah and Mrs. Nayanaben Jatin Shah for the offences committed by them under Section – 628 of the said Act.
3. In response to the notice issued by this court, affidavit – in – reply is filed on behalf of the Registrar of Companies pointing out that in pursuance of the representation of the petitioner, proceedings came to be initiated by the respondent No. 1 and the company did supply the relevant documents, however, thereafter there is no further communication. Shri J. M. Malkan, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 1 and 2 has submitted that pursuant to the complaint submitted by the petitioner, inquiry has been initiated, however, there is no final decision taken.
4. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and without going into the legality and validity of any action of the respondent company, and without deciding anything on merits of the case, the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 are directed to complete the inquiry and take appropriate decision on communication / representation dated 27.10.2001 as early as possible preferably within three months from the date of receipt of this order and shall communicate the outcome of the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 3. It is also observed that ultimately if it is found that there is substance in the contentions and allegations made by the petitioner, in that case, the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 are directed to proceed further against the respondent company in accordance with law considering the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 accordingly.
5. With aforesaid observations and direction, the present special civil application is disposed of at this stage.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Direct service is permitted to respondent No. 1 and also to petitioner qua respondent No. 1.
[ M. R. Shah, J. ]