K K PURI Vs. A K PURI
LAWS(J&K)-1993-9-1
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Decided on September 24,1993

K.K.PURI Appellant
VERSUS
A.K.PURI Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

SAT PAL VS. SHILPA RANI AND ORS [LAWS(J&K)-2019-5-5] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)These two appeals are directed against ex parte ad interim orders dated 22/07/1993 and 3/08/1993 passed in suits Nos. 10 and 13 of 1993 by the learned District Judge, Jammu. The fate of these appeals depends upon the interpretation to be placed on the provisions of Order 39 Rule 3, CPC and all that primarily falls for determination is whether the rule is mandatory in character and whether non-compliance of its provisions results in invalidating the ex parte ad interim injunction.
(2.)The origin of the controversy can be traced to a family feud which has assumed the dimensions of corporation warfare of sorts. The parties are closely related and the two main contenders (appellant No. 1 and respondent No. 1) are brothers. They are spearheading two warring groups in the two private limited Companies called "Devi Dass-Gopal Krishan Pvt. Ltd." and "Puri Brothers Industries (P) Ltd." The third group is represented by the widow of the third brother, late J. K. Puri and all are engaged in gaining control of the Company which is mainly engaged in manufacture of edible oil.
(3.)It transpires that rival groups at one stage decided to part Company. Some settlement is said to have been reached between them authorising one R.C. Gupta Chartered Accountant to bifurcate and distribute the assets of the Company and to appoint appellant No. 1 as Managing Director of the Company. Appellants are alleged to have back traced resulting in rupture of the settlement and the institution of the suits in the court of District Judge, Jammu. The only difference in the two suits is that they are filed in the name of two different plaintiffs. Otherwise the reliefs prayed are identical seeking declaration that the meetings of the plaintiff Company held on 10/04/199 3/06/1993 and Ju 30/06/1993 and extraordinary General meeting of the shareholders dated 26/05/1993 and the notice issued by appellant No. 1 convening an extraordinary General meeting to be held on 26/07/1993 at Moga was illegal, non est, unlawful, unauthorised and ultra vires the provisions of the Companies Act. A prohibitory injunction is also sought against appellants restraining them from holding the meeting of shareholders on 26/07/1993 and from acting upon or to implement or otherwise enforce the decisions taken by them in the meetings under challenge.


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