Babu Ram Agrawal v. R. A. M. Earth Movers (P) Ltd.
1994-09-08
M.C.JAIN
body1994
DigiLaw.ai
JUDGMENT 1. - A preliminary objection has been raised for and on behalf of the respondents that the company petition has been filed for and on behalf of three petitioners, namely, (1) Babu Ram Agrawal, (2) Rewa Goya] and (3) Nirmala Agrawal, but it bears the signature of petitioners No. 3 Nirmala Agrawal only; it is accompanied with an affidavit of Nirmala only; Nirmala has admittedly less than 10% shares; neither consent of the petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 nor their affidavits have been enclosed with the company petition and as such it is not maintainable. Reliance was placed on P.S. Nanawati v. Jaipur Metals and Electricals Ltd. (1990) 69 Comp Cas 769 (Raj) . 2. In reply, it has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petition has been moved in the prescribed Form No. 43. This Form does not require that all the petitioners should sign the petition, rule 22 (21 ?)) Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 (hereinafter to be called 'the rules') simply requires that a petition shall be verified by an affidavit of the petitioners or one of the petitioners, where there are more than one petitioners. All the three petitioners have more than 10% shareholding. He relied upon Narinder Singh and others v. Randhawa Transport Company (P) Ltd. (1973) 43 Comp Cas 341 (P&H) . 3. It is the admitted case of the parties that all the three petitioners have more than 10% shareholding of the respondent company. The question is whether the consent of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 was required to be filed along with the company petition. Rule 88(1) of the rules runs as under : "88. Petition under section 397 or 398.-(1) Where a petition is presented under section 397 or 398 on behalf of any members of a company entitled to apply under section 399(1), by any one or more of them, the letter of consent signed by the rest of the members so entitled authorising the petitioner or petitioners to present the petition on their behalf, shall be annexed to the petition, and the names and addresses of all the members on whose behalf the petition is presented shall be set out in a schedule to the petition, and where the company has a share capital, the petition shall state whether the petitioners have paid all calls and other such due on their respective shares.
Where the petition is presented by any member or members authorised by the Central Government under section 399(4), the order of the Central Government authorising a member or members to present the petition shall be similarly annexed to the petition. A petition under section 397 shall be in Form No. 43, and a petition under section 398 shall be in Form No. 44." 4. It is further clear from a perusal of Form Nos. 43 and 44 that the names and addresses of the members who have given their consent to the petition have to be mentioned in the Schedule and letters of their consent are to be annexed to the petition. The names of the members of the company who are arrayed as petitioners are not required to be given in the schedule and their letters of consent are also not required to be annexed with the petition. Admittedly, Baburam Agrawal and Rewa Goyal are the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 in this company petition. As such their letters of consent were not required. Similar view has been taken in Narinder Singh v. Randhawa Transport Company (P) Ltd. (1973) 43 Comp Cas 341 (P&H) . The facts of P.S. Nanawati v. Jaipur Metals and Electricals Ltd. (1990) 69 Comp Cas 769 (Raj) , are quite different and distinguishable. In it, the petitioners P.S. Nanawati and N.S. Chhajer themselves were not having 10% shareholding. They and their friends and relatives had more than 10% shareholdings and, admittedly, their friends and relatives were not petitioner and their letters of consent filed were not proper and valid. Thus there is no force in the preliminary objection. 5. Form Nos. 43 and 44 show that the company petition should bear signature of all the petitioners. 6. Accordingly, the preliminary objection is over-ruled. The petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are given two weeks' time to sign the company petition. *******