ANDREW YULE AND COMPANY LIMITED Vs. DESCON LIMITED
LAWS(CAL)-2008-2-8
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on February 08,2008

ANDREW YULE AND COMPANY LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
DESCON LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THE instant appeal arises from a judgement and order dated 17th November, 2006 passed by the hon'ble First Court, dismissing the interlocutory application of the plaintiff/petitioner.
(2.) IT would appear from the observations made by the Hon'ble First court that the genesis of the interlocutory proceeding, initiated by the plaintiff/petitioner lied in the proposal of the defendant/respondent, descon LIMITED (hereinafter referred to as DESCON), to issue equity shares in favour of venture capitalists on preferential basis upto a limit of 49% (forty nine percent) of the increased subscribed equity shares of the company at a premium of not less than Rs. 600/ (rupees six hundred only) for every further share of Rs. 10/- each.
(3.) FROM the prayers set out hereinbelow, it will appear that the plaintiff/petitioner was, inter alia, seeking an order of injunction restraining DESCON from holding the Extra- ordinary General meeting (hereinafter referred to as EGM) in terms of notice appearing at "annexure H" to the interlocutory application and also for an injunction restraining the defendant/respondent, their men, servants and agents or otherwise from giving effect or further effect to any resolution passed at the said EGM: "a) Injunction restraining the respondent No. 1 from holding the Extra Ordinary General Meeting in terms of the notice being Annexure H hereof, b) Injunction restraining the respondents, their men, servants and agents or otherwise from giving effect or further effect to any resolution passed at the Extra Ordinary general Meeting of the respondent No. 1 held and/or to be held on 9th June, 2006. c) Declaration that any resolution passed at the Extra ordinary General Meeting of the respondent No. 1 on 9th june, 2006 for allotment of any shares in favour of any venture capitalists or any other authority is illegal, null and void. d) Ad-interim orders in terms of prayers above. e) Costs of and incidental to this application be borne by the respondents. f) Such further order or orders be passed and/or direction or directions be given as to this Hon'ble Court may seem fit and proper. ";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.