Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta, J. - (1.) By this motion the plaintiffs/petitioners have sought for interlocutory reliefs which are in effect if granted, would amount to decreeing the suit itself at the interlocutory stage. It is not unheard of under the law altogether, that final relief cannot be granted at the interlocutory stage, but there shall /be compelling facts and circumstances on which such relief may be granted.
(2.) Now the task of this Court would be to find out, whether any such case has been made out for granting such interlocutory reliefs, or not. The reliefs claimed by the plaintiffs/petitioners are set out hereunder : a. Injunction restraining the respondents/defendants and each one of them from acting upon or giving any effect or further effect to the purported agreements for pledge dated November 28, 1997 and December 3, 1997, entered into by and between the petitioners No. 1 and 2 on the one hand and respondent/defendant No. 8 on the other hand, and the notices dated 29th June, 2002 and 31st July, 2002. b. Injunction restraining the respondents/defendants and each one of them from giving any effect or further effect to the resolutions passed at the Extraordinary General Meeting of the Company held on 29th July, 2002. c. Injunction restraining the defendants/respondents and each one of them from conducting and/or holding the Board Meeting of the Company scheduled to be held on 7th August, 2002, pursuant to the notices dated 31st July, 2002 and 7th August, 2002. d. Injunction restraining the respondents/defendants and each one of them from giving any effect or further effect to the resolution having been passed in respect of items Nos. 7 and 8 of the notices dated July 31, 2002 to convene the Board Meeting of the Company for August 7, 2002. . e. Injunction restraining the respondents/defendants and each one of them from exercising their rights or receiving any benefit in respect of the share holding of the petitioners or any part thereof and in the company, and in particular, in respect of 17,87,024 equity shares standing in the name of the petitioner No. 1 and 18,06,267 equity shares standing in the name of the petitioner No. 2. f. Injunction directing the respondents/defendants and each one of them to permit the petitioners to exercise their voting rights and receive benefits in respect of 17,87,024 equity shares standing in the name of the petitioner No. 1 and 18,06,267 equity shares standing in the name of the petitioner No. 2 of and in the company. g. Injunction directing the respondent No. 8 to forthwith release 17,87,024 equity share standing in the name of the petitioner No. 1 of and in the company to the petitioner No. 1 and 18,06,267 equity shares standing in the name of the petitioner No. 2 of and in the company to the petitioner No. 2. h. Injunction directing the respondents/defendants to cancel the votes cast in respect of the share holding of the petitioners of and in the company by the respondents No. 8 at the Extraordinary general meeting of the Company held on July. 29, 2002. i. Injunction directing the respondents and each one of them not to issue and/or allot any share or any debenture of and in the company pursuant to the resolution purportedly passed by the Extraordinary General Meeting of the Company held on 29th July, 2002 or any subsequent Board Meeting of the Company including that convened on August 7, 2002, pursuant to the notice dated July 31, 2002. j. Injunction directing the respondents and each one of them to return the share certificates relating to the share holding of the petitioner of and in the company, which are lying with the respondent No. 8.
(3.) The case made out by the petitioners is shortly put as follows : The petitioners jointly hold approximately 33 percent of the paid up capital of the company amounting to Rs. 10,87,30,000/- which is made up of 1,08,73,000 equity shares of Rs. 10 each of the paid up capital of the company. In or about 1997 the respondents No. 2 and 3 were and still are in control of the management of the company, were interested in obtaining credit facilities for the company from the banks and/or financial institutions, and as such they represented the petitioners that as part of the terms of the agreement signed by the respondent No. 8 for grant of credit facility to the company, the shares held in the company by the petitioners were required to be pledged in favour of the respondent No. 8 by way of interim security till final security is furnished, inter alia by way of mortgage of immovable property were furnished by the company to the respondent No. 8. ;