SANJIB BANERJEE,J. - (1.) The events subsequent to the institution of the appeal have overtaken the parties. The appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 is against an order passed by the principal bench of the Company Law Board refusing to transfer proceedings under Section 111(A) of the Act from the eastern region bench to the principal bench or the northern bench. The primary ground urged in course of the request for transfer was that similar proceedings relating to other group companies were pending before the northern bench and all of them could have been heard and disposed of together.
(2.) Following the order impugned, the proceedings pending before the eastern region bench were taken up and have been substantially heard. The respondents in the appeal have already been heard. In such view of the matter, no useful purpose would be served in taking up this appeal on merits since the proceedings before the eastern region bench may be concluded in the immediate future.
(3.) There is a further point which is of relevance. Notwithstanding the appellants' endeavour to have the proceedings heard and disposed of together, the probable appeals from the orders passed therein could never been carried to the same High Court since the registered offices of the several companies were in different States.;