Verma, J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) The main question for decision in this appeal is the meaning of the expression "the High Court" in S. 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 which has been inserted in the principal Act by the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1988 with effect from 31-5-1991. The controversy is whether the High Court to which the appeal lies u/S. 10F from an order of the Company Law Board is the High Court having jurisdiction in relation to the place at which the registered office of the company is situate or it is the High Court having jurisdiction in relation to the place at which the Company Law Board makes the order under appeal.
(3.) The material facts giving rise to the above question are only a few, as stated hereafter. A petition u/S. 397/ 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 was filed on behalf of the appellant, Stridewell Leathers Private Ltd. before the Company Law Board in respect of the company known as Shoe Specialities Pvt. Ltd. having its registered office at Madras. On 28-5-1993, the Company Law Board in the Principal Bench at Delhi made an order in that petition against which an appeal was filed u/S. 10F in the Delhi High Court by a shareholder, respondent No. 1. The Company, Shoe Specialities Pvt. Ltd. also filed an appeal against the same order of the Company Law Board in the Madras High Court (CMA No. 793/ 93) which is pending. A preliminary objection to maintainability of the appeal in the Delhi High Court was raised by the present appellants in the appeal filed in the Delhi High Court. The Delhi High Court rejected the preliminary objection on 29-7-1993 and admitted that appeal. This appeal by special leave is against the Delhi High Court's order dated 29-7-1993 rejecting the preliminary objection and holding the appeal to be maintainable in the Delhi High Court.;