before the company law board - Company Law Board Mumbai Bench

18affairs of subsidiary company as well.” In that case the subsidiarycompany was an Indian Company. In the present case thesubsidiary company is registered outside India. But the principleslaid down by the High Court are binding on this Bench.The Court of appeal also held that the ‘affairs of the Company’ isone of the widest import which can include the affairs of thesubsidiary. Equally, I would hold that the affairs of the subsidiarycan also be the affairs of its holding company, especially where, ashere, the directors of the holding company which necessarilycontrols the affairs of the subsidiary, also represent a majority ofthe directors of the subsidiary. I do follow the judgement of theCourt of appeal. In the present case the MSM Singapore iscontrolled by the R1 Company, hence this Bench can look into theaffairs of the MSM Singapore in these proceedings in relation to itsbusiness and financial affairs as stated supra. The Learned SeniorCounsel for the respondents contended that this Bench does nothave the jurisdiction to deal with the affairs of the MSM Singaporesince it is registered in Singapore and placed reliance in the matterof K.Lingayya Setty supra. Since I hold that the affairs of MSMSingapore can be dealt with by this Bench, it being a whollyowned subsidiary of Indian Holding Company. The LearnedSenior Counsel for the respondents relied upon the citation of thisBoard in the matter of Dabhol Power Company & Ors. (supra)CA 177 of 2010Multi Screen