Jer Rutton Kavasmneck alias Jer Jawahar Thandi - Bombay High ...

hvn
42/195
COAPPL41.12
46. Mr. Sen, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent nos. 4 and 5
invited my attention to Para 6 of the order dated 21 st May, 2012 passed by CLB
allowing the first respondent company to go ahead with convening the
meeting, however, making it clear that the resolution passed, if any in the
EOGM on 21 st May, 2012 shall be kept in abeyance till further orders. The
learned counsel invited my attention to the order sheet dated 21 st May, 2012
in the Company Application (73 of 2012) which reads thus :
“Part heard. Company Application No. 74 of 2012 with
respect to interim injunction as prayed for in Company Application
No. 73 of 2012. R-I company is hereby allowed to hold EOGM
scheduled on 22-5-2012 at 11.30 a.m. That the resolution if any
passed, shall not be given effect to till further orders. Detailed order
follows.”
47. Mr. Sen, the learned counsel submits that it is clear that the order passed
by the CLB on 21 st May, 2012 was pro tem/ad interim order and the matter
being part heard, was to be heard subsequently after EOGM was held on 21 st
May, 2012. Company Application (73 of 2012) was specifically kept part
heard. The learned counsel submits that thus the CLB has not passed any
order reviewing its earlier order but has passed the final order on the
Company Application (85 of 2012) after hearing the parties after EOGM
meeting came to be held. The final order dated 13 th August, 2011 also
records that the order dated 21 st May, 2012 was ad interim order and the
matter was part heard. It is submitted that the order dated 21 st May, 2012 was