1 CHS.1036.2009.sxw mnm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.1036 OF 2009 IN SUIT NO. 2429 OF 1997 Naina D. Kamani ...Plaintiff Vs. Janson Engineering & Trading Pvt. Ltd. ...Defendants And Mr. N. Srinivasan ...Respondent Mr. F.E. D’vitre, Sr. Advocate a/w. Mr. M.S. Doctor a/w. Mr. Nimay Dave i/b. Bachubhai Munim & Co., for Plaintiff Mr. M.P.S. Rao i/b. A.A. Maniyar for Defendant No.1 Mr. Rajesh Patil i/b. Mahesh Jani & Co., for Defendant No.6 Mr. Ashok Varma i/b. Jagdish Kumar Gupta for Defendant No.7 CORAM : SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J. Reserved on : 1st August, 2011 Pronounced on : 25th August 2011 P.C. 1. This Chamber Summons is taken out by the Plaintiff who is one of the three permanent Directors of Defendant No.1 Company for directing Defendant No.6 and the Respondent to make payments of taxes and the assessment cess demanded by the Mumbai Municipal Corporation (MMC) in respect of the flats occupied by them in the suit building. She has prayed that in the alternate she be permitted to collect the taxes from Defendant No.6 to pay to MMC. The building belongs to Defendant No.1 Company. The business of Defendant No.1 Company is essentially only to manage the suit property. Defendant No.1 resides in one of the flats as a tenant of 2 CHS.1036.2009.sxw the company. The Plaintiff also resides in another flat and so does Defendant No.3 who is another Director of the Company. 2. It is for the Company to collect the taxes and cess in the course of its business and to make payments promptly as required under the law. It is for the Directors who occupy the flat to contribute the taxes as required. It will be for the Directors to manage the Company upon passing such resolutions as are required in that behalf inter alia for collection and payment of the taxes to the Municipality. It is not for the Court to direct such payments to be made by the Company. 3. It may be mentioned that the Plaintiff herself has applied for various reliefs against Defendant No.1 Company and its Directors from passing any resolutions at board meetings and against acting upon the resolutions passed at various board meetings. By doing so, the Plaintiff cannot call upon the Court to perform the functions of the Directions who are the Agents of the Company. 4. The Chamber Summons is completely misconceived and hence dismissed. (SMT. ROSHAN DALVI, J.)