NUPUR MITRA Vs. BASUBANI P LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant petition was disposed by this Bench by an order dated 13-10-2000. However, due to administrative difficulties, the same was dispatched to the parties only on 22-11-2000. Before the receipt of the said order, the petitioners had filed two applications--one on 2-11-2000 and another on 20-11-2000, enclosing therewith certain documents, which according to them were relevant in determining the issues in the petition and as such they had sought for taking them on record and also for further hearing of the petition. Along with the first application, they had enclosed certain documents including two balance sheets which had not been produced during the hearing of the main petition. One is an unsigned manuscript balance sheet as on 31-3-1949 and the other unsigned typed balance sheet as on 31-3-1948. In the second application, they had enclosed a copy of a signed balance sheet as on 31-3-1949. Since the applications were filed after the signing of the order, these applications were not placed before this Bench. On receipt of the order dated 13-10-2000, the petitioners filed a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court for directions to this Bench to consider these two applications and in the meanwhile keep the said order of this Bench suspended. THE High Court by an order dated 18-1-2001, directed this Bench to consider these two applications by giving a hearing to the parties and thereafter decide whether to retain the order dated 13-10-2000 or recall the same.

(2.) These two applications were heard on 1-3-2001. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Shri Mitra, submitted as follows : At the time when the petition was heard, there was no document available with the petitioners to support their claim that the company had in fact allotted 175 shares to the 4 subscribers to the memorandum. However, in the month of October 2000, the petitioners were able to trace the balance sheets as on 31-3-1948 and 31-3-1949. These balance sheets would indicate that the 4 subscribers to the memorandum had paid money towards 175 shares and as such these shares must have been allotted during that year. If so, then, further allotment of 500 shares on 24-12-1949 ultra vires the memorandum. Now that proof of allotment of 175 shares has been placed before the CLB, it should declare the further allotment of 500 shares as null and void rectify the register of members deleting the name of those who now hold these 500 shares.

(3.) AFTER this hearing was concluded, the petitioners again filed another application, enclosing therewith a copy of the balance sheet as on 31-3-1950, with the prayer to consider the same also along with the ones submitted earlier. According to the petitioners, this balance sheet was discovered by them subsequent to the hearing on 1-3-2001 and as such the same should be taken on record and considered. In view of this new document, we decided to hear the parties on this application and, accordingly, arguments were heard on 17-4-2001.