Case Note & Summary
The present appeal was filed under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 against an order of the Company Law Board dated 8.12.2000. The dispute pertained to a company, Bombay Cable Car Co. Pvt. Ltd., which was incorporated to carry on business of transportation via a rope-way system. The original share capital was held by the Rashid Group (appellants 1 to 4) holding 61.67% of the shares. In April 1988, the Pune Municipal Corporation issued a tender for a passenger rope-way system, which was accepted by the company, and an agreement was executed on 5.7.1991 for a project amounting to Rs. 6.5 crores. The Rashid Group required a financial partner and entered into an agreement on 19.6.1993 with the Lokhandwala Group, who agreed to invest Rs. 125 lacs in exchange for 19,170 equity shares. However, the appellants did not press their substantial challenge to the impugned order and sought withdrawal of the appeal. The court, noting that the appellants were not pressing the challenge, dismissed the appeal as withdrawn without going into the details of the facts or merits of the case.
Headnote
A) Company Law - Appeal under Section 10F - Withdrawal of Appeal - The appellants did not press the substantial challenge to the impugned order and sought withdrawal of the appeal. The court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn without going into the merits of the case. (Para 2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appeal should be allowed or dismissed on merits.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Withdrawal of appeal
- consent terms
- dismissal without adjudication on merits
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (01) 31
Company Appeal No. 4 of 2003 in Company Petition No. 63 of 1998
Shri S.H. Doctor with P. Kabadi i/by Doijode Phatarphekar & Associates for the Appellants; Mr. K.R. Bulchandani with J.P. Shah i/by Kamal & Co. for respondent no. 1; Shri V.G. Majumdar i/by C.V. Lad for Respondent No.2
B.M. Jain & Sons Co. Pvt. Ltd., & Anr.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 against an order of the Company Law Board.
Remedy Sought
The appellants sought to challenge the order of the Company Law Board dated 8.12.2000.
Filing Reason
The appellants were aggrieved by the order of the Company Law Board.
Previous Decisions
The Company Law Board passed an order on 8.12.2000, which was challenged in this appeal.
Issues
Whether the appeal should be allowed on merits.
Submissions/Arguments
The appellants did not press the substantial challenge to the impugned order and sought withdrawal of the appeal.
Ratio Decidendi
When the appellant does not press the appeal and seeks withdrawal, the court may dismiss the appeal as withdrawn without adjudicating on merits.
Judgment Excerpts
The present appeal is filed under section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 against the order passed by the Company Law Board dated 8.12.2000.
In view of the fact that the appellant in the present case is not pressing their substantial challenge to the impugned order in the present appeal, I do not propose to go into the details of various facts.
Procedural History
The appeal was filed under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 against an order of the Company Law Board dated 8.12.2000. The appellants did not press the appeal and sought withdrawal. The court dismissed the appeal as withdrawn on 13.1.2005.
Acts & Sections
