- (1.) The Court : By consent of the parties, the appeal and application are taken together by treating the same as on day s list. There will be an order in terms of prayers (a) and (b) of the stay petition.
(2.) This appeal is directed against an order dated September 30, 2011 by which the second defendant was permitted to convene the meeting called by the requisitionists on October 12, 2011 for the purpose of adjournment. The Trial Judge has directed that all the interlocutory applications taken out by the different parties in the suit shall be heard after the exchange of affidavits on November 1, 2011.
(3.) Mr.Mitra tried to impress upon us that under Section 169 of the Companies Act if the meeting called by the requisitionists is not held within the statutory period, the same would lapse automatically. It appears that similar argument was advanced before the Trial Judge and the Trial Judge after considering the purport of the said provision exercised discretion in passing the impugned order. It is the settled law that the Appellate Courts shall be slow and circumspect to interfere with the discretion exercised by the Trial Court in passing an order unless the same appears to be irrational, illegal and not in consonance with the legal sphere. Thus, we do not find any ground to interfere in this appeal.;