RAO SAHEB MANILAL GANGARAM SINDORE Vs. WESTERN INDIA THEATRES LTD
LAWS(BOM)-1962-2-3
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on February 08,1962

RAO SAHEB MANILAL GANGARAM SINDORE Appellant
VERSUS
WESTERN INDIA THEATRES LTD. Respondents







JUDGEMENT

- (1.)I am afraid this suit will have to be dismissed on the preliminary issue that is raised on behalf of the 1st defendant company in consequence of a notice given by it to the plaintiffs and the issue is as to whether this Court has Jurisdiction to entertain this suit, The reason why this is raised is that the subject-matter of the suit has been valued by the plaintiffs at R.s. l,300/- and obviously, therefore, this Court will have no. jurisdiction to entertain this suit.
(2.)The suit is filed by the plaintiffs for rectification of the register of members maintained by the 1st defendant company, alleging that the latter had wrongfully refused to register in their names certain shares in respect of which they had submitted to the company a duly completed transfer form. It is not necessary for me to set out the various allegations that have been made by the plaintiffs in the plaint in support of their contention that they are entitled to call upon the 1st defendant company to rectify the register of members and register the transfer to the shares in question in their names. It is enough for the present to indicate that the value of the shares which are the subject-matter of the suit is fixed at R.s. 1,200/-and the relief claimed In prayer (b) of the plaint, which Is only an interim relief, is valued at R.s. 1007- and on this valuation of the aggregate amount of R.s. 1,300/- the plaintiffs claim that this Court in exercise of its Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction is competent to entertain and. decide the suit. In course of the plaint it is undoubtedly-stated that the relief claimed in the suit is one under Section 155 of the 'Companies Act, 1956, which deals with-rectification of register of members.
(3.)It is contended on behalf of the 1st defendant company that the remedy under Section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956, is by an application, that the rules made by. the Supreme Court in exercise of the powers given to it by the Companies Act provide for a petition for the purpose of getting a relief under Section 155 of the Companies Act, that the present proceeding not being in the natures-of a petition, does not fall under Section 155 of the companies Act and, that, therefore, the relevant provisions to the Code of Civil Procedure will apply for the purpose or determining as to whether the present suit is cognizable By this Court or not. Mr. Gupta, the learned counsel for the-plaintiffs, on the other hand, urged that the word "Court" as used in Section 155 of the Companies Act, 1956, was. defined in the Companies Act itself to mean the High Court for the purpose of the relief contemplated by that section-and that, therefore, it was immaterial whether the proceeding adopted for the purpose of that relief was either by way of a petition or a suit. Mr. Gupta further urged that in any event, I should treat the suit as a petition and proceed to decide the respective contentions of the parties.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.