ASSET RECONSTRUCTION CO. (INDIA) LTD. Vs. UNIWORTH TEXTILES LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS common order governs identical CA Nos. 339/2011 and 484/2010 filed by the respondent -company in CP No. 3/2010 and 4/2010, respectively. Both CP Nos. 3/2010 and 4/2010 have been filed before the Principal Bench, Company Law Board ('CLB') under section 247 along with section 237(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act').

(2.) THE registered office of the company, i.e., Uniworth Textiles Ltd. (CP No. 3) is situated at Calcutta (West Bengal) while the registered office of the company, i.e., Indoworth India Ltd. (CP No. 4/2010) is situated in Nagpur (Maharashtra).

(3.) THE only premise on which CA Nos. 484 and CA No. 339 have been argued before me by both counsel appearing for the company is that the words " in the course of any proceedings before it" appearing in section 247(1A) of the Act should be interpreted as "in the course of any proceedings other than under section 247(1A)". In other words according to the respondent a stand alone application under section 247(1A) does not lie before the CLB. It was argued that even if the Bench having jurisdiction to hear a petition under section 237(6) arrived at a conclusion that an investigation as contemplated by section 247(1A) should be ordered it would have to refer such petition to the Principal Bench of the CLB which alone has, under the distribution of work order, jurisdiction to pass an order under section 247(1A). Reliance was placed on Birla Corporation Ltd. v. East India Investment Co. Ltd., [2006] 71 CLA 181 (Cal.)/, [2006] 133 CC 515; Alaknanda Manufacturing v. Bahubali Services, [1994] 13 CLA 41 (CLB)/[1996] 86 CC 291; Mirza Mohd. Afzal Beg v. State of Jammu and Kashmir : AIR 1960 J&K 1/ 1960 Crl. LJ 62 and K U Kulkarni v. Ganpat Hiraji Tell : AIR 1942 Bom. 191/ [1942] 44 Bom. LR 264.