Ganguly,J. - (1.) The controversy over which the court was addressed on several days in this matter is whether this appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act') from the order of the CLB is to be heard by the company judge sitting singly or this appeal has to be heard by the Division Bench of this court which hears, under Section 483 of the Act, appeals from the orders/judgments of the company judge.
(2.) In the fitness of things it is proper to set out Section 10F. Section 10F runs thus: "Section 10F. Appeals against the orders of the Company Law Board.- Any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Company Law Board may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Company Law Board to him on any question of law arising out of such order: Provided that the High Court may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days." The section itself does not exactly answer this controversy and so it lingers on and it appears that courts have not spoken uniformly on this issue either. Under the said Act, the word 'court' has been used in various sections and some of those sections, which are relevant in the context of the controversy, are set out below : Section 2(11) of this Act is in the following terms : "(11) 'the court' means,-- (a) with respect at any matter relating to a company (other than any offence against this Act), the court having jurisdiction under this Act with respect to that matter relating to that company, as provided in Section 10; (b) with respect to any offence against this Act, the Court of a Magistrate of the First Class or, as the case may be, a Presidency Magistrate, having jurisdiction to try such offence;" Section 10 is in the following terms : "10. Jurisdiction of Courts. - (1) The court having jurisdiction under this Act shall be- (a) the High Court having jurisdiction in relation to the place at which the registered office of the company concerned is situate, except to the extent to which jurisdiction has been conferred on any District Court or District Courts subordinate to that High Court in pursuance of Sub-section (2); and (b) where jurisdiction has been so conferred, the District Court in regard to matters falling within the scope of the jurisdiction conferred, in respect of companies having their registered offices in the district. (2) The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette and subject to such restrictions, limitations and conditions as it thinks fit, empower any District Court to exercise all or any of the jurisdiction conferred by this Act upon the court, not being the jurisdiction conferred - (a) in respect of companies generally, by Sections 237, 391, 394, 395 and 397 to 407, both inclusive; (b) in respect of companies with a paid-up share capital of not less than one lakh of rupees by Part VII (Sections 425 to 560) and the other provisions of this Act relating to the winding up of companies. (3) For the purposes of jurisdiction to wind up companies, the expression 'registered office' means the place which has longest been the registered office of the company during the six months immediately preceding the presentation of the petition for winding up."
(3.) Section 433 of the Act also refers to the expression 'court' when it provides that 'a company may be wound up by the court'. But the rest of the section is not important here.;