Omkar Infrastructure Ltd. was engaged in construction and development of infrastructure related projects. Due to the liquidity and other management issues the Company was making losses since last few years. The minority
CS Professional · Resolution of Corporate Disputes, Non-Compliances & Remedies · PYQS · December 2021
Omkar Infrastructure Ltd. was engaged in construction and development of infrastructure related projects. Due to the liquidity and other management issues the Company was making losses since last few years. The minority shareholders of the Company filed a class action suit in the Tribunal alleging that the affairs of the Company are being conducted in a manner prejudicial to the interest of the Company. The Tribunal passed an Order restraining the Company from taking action contrary to any resolution passed by the members. The Company failed to comply with Order passed by the Tribunal. Explain in brief, whether the Order passed by the Tribunal is justified and what legal consequences will the Company have to face in case of such non-compliance.
Answer & Explanation:
According to section 245(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 (the Act), such number of members or depositors or any class of them, as are indicated in section 245(2) of the Act may, if they are of the opinion that the management or conduct of the affairs of the company are being conducted in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the company or its members or depositors, file an application before the National Company Law Tribunal (Tribunal) on behalf of such members or depositors for seeking certain order mentioned therein. The said order that may be sought from Tribunal inter alia includes an order to restrain the company from taking action contrary to any resolution passed by the members. Hence, it can be concluded that the Order passed by the Tribunal is justified, as it is passed in exercise of the specific authority conferred on the Tribunal u/s 245(1)(f) of the Act. As per section 245(7) of the Act, any company which fails to comply with an order passed by the Tribunal under this section shall be punishable with fine which shall not be less than five lakh rupees but which may extend to twenty-five lakh rupees and every officer of the company who is in default shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine which shall not be less than twenty-five thousand rupees but which may extend to one lakh rupees. Further, Section 425 of the Companies Act, 2013, the Tribunal has also been conferred the same jurisdiction, powers and authority in respect of contempt of its Orders as conferred on High Court under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Topics: Corporate Governance and Disputes
Related Questions in this Topic
- Differentiate between Punishment for False Statement and Punishment for False Evidence under the Companies Act, 2013.
- Mr. P who was a Managing Director of XYZ Ltd, was terminated from the position of Managing Director by virtue of an orde...
- Amit Sinha, commonly known as Sethji, has been accused of certain offenses under the SEBI Act, 1992. SEBI directed him t...
- State the punishment prescribed under Companies Act, 2013 for the following: (iv) Improper use of words "Limited" or "Pr...
- State the punishment prescribed under Companies Act, 2013 for the following: (iii) Punishment for wrongful withholding o...