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

hvn
46/195
COAPPL41.12
meeting and if the company does not convene the meeting, the requisitionists
have the right after the prescribed period to go ahead with the convening of
the meeting. It is observed that this right of the shareholders is except in
exceptional circumstances not curtailed by the CLB. In view thereof, the CLB
allowed the first respondent to convene the meeting proposed to be held on
22 nd May, 2012 and recorded that the resolution passed if any in the EOGM
dated 22 nd May, 2012 shall be kept in abeyance till further orders. The
attendance cum order sheet dated 21 st May, 2012 indicates that the Company
Application (73 of 2012) was part heard with respect to interim inunction as
prayed for in the said application. It is not in dispute that the meeting was
thereafter held on 22 nd May, 2012 as scheduled and it was resolved to delete
article 57. Perusal of the Company Application (85 of 2012) filed by the first
respondent company shows that the company had prayed for
modifying/vacating and/or varying ad interim order dated 21 st May, 2012.
From the perusal of the order dated 21 st May, 2012, it is clear that the said
order was an ad interim order and was operative only until further orders.
Company Application (73 of 2012) filed by the appellants for seeking interim
injunction was part heard and was pending. The CLB had not fixed any
further date for hearing of the said company application and this mater did not
appear on board. The first respondent thereafter applied for
vacating/modifying and or varying the said order dated 21 st May, 2012 in view
of the meeting having been held on22 nd May, 2012 and the resolution to delete