IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2010 / 6TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 21537 of 2009(J) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- MANJU PRABHA PRASAD PILLAI, W/O.V.RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI, AGED 52 YEARS, 2A, HEERA VELMOUNT PALACE, KAUDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-04. BY ADVS. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN, SRI.T.K.ANANDA PADMANABHAN. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. R.P.HOSPITALITIES PRIVATE LIMITED, AISWARYA, T.C.9/414, G-3, JAWAHAR NAGAR, KAUDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-04. 2. I.VIJAYAMBIKA, DIRECTOR, R.P.HOSPITALITIES PVT.LTD., AISHWARYA T.C. 9/414, G-3, JAWAHAR NAGAR, KAUDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-03. 3. C.S.GOVINDARAJAN, BENCH OFFICER, COMPANY LAW BOARD, CHENNAI BRANCH, UTI BUILDINGS, 3RD FLOOR, 29, RAJAJI SALAI, CHENNAI-01. R2 BY ADVS. SRI.M.R.ANANDAKUTTAN, SMT.M.A.ZOHRA, SRI.R.S.MADHU, SRI.MAHESH ANANDAKUTTAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.21537/2009 J APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION. P2: COPY OF THE CHEQUE DTD. 24/09/2004. P3: COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE COMPANY TO THE PETITIONER DTD. 09/10/2004. P4: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 09/10/2004 ISSUED BY THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF THE COMPANY TO THE PETITIONER. P5: COPY OF THE MINUTES DTD. 17/11/2006. P6: COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BEFORE THE COMPANY LAW BOARD DTD. 8/07/2008. P7: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 25/03/2009 RECEIVED FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE Kss S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 21537 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 28th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims that she has given a sum of 1,46,387/- US Dollars to the 1st respondent company on the assurance that she will be issued share certificates of the company for that amount within a month. She paid the same by cheque on 24.09.2004. The petitioner's husband was the Managing Director of the 1st respondent company. He died on 29.11.2006. Since the share certificates were not issued, the petitioner filed a petition before the Company Law Board as evidenced by Ext.P6. However the Bench Officer of the Company Law Board by Ext.P7 directed the petitioner as follows: “With reference to the subject cited, I am to state that the above petition filed in the matter of M/s. R.P. Hospitalities Private Limited has been scrutinized and for that the petitioner has not enclosed any proof of her shareholding in the Company. In absence of the said proof, it can not be decided whether she has complied with requirements of section 399 of the Companies Act, 1956. Hence the petition cannot be registered. In this connection you are hereby requested to file any proof such as share certificates or Annual Return for her share holding as mentioned in the petition so as to enable this office to take further action in this regard.” W.P.(C)No. 21537 of 2009 -2- 2. The petitioner challenges the same seeking the following reliefs: “a) To call for the entire records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P-7 and issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature and quash the same. b) To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order in the nature directing the 3rd respondent to number the application and post the petition before the Bench for appropriate orders. c) To direct respondents 1 and 2 to issue share certificates to the petitioner within a time frame as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.” 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent controverting the averments in the writ petition regarding the payment of the amount by the petitioner. Another contention is also raised that the 2nd respondent is the wife of the former managing director and not the petitioner. 4. The Bench Officer has forwarded a counter affidavit to the Registrar supporting Ext.P7. According to him, he has powers to issue Ext.P7. 5. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. I am of opinion that, an order like Ext.P7 can only be passed W.P.(C)No. 21537 of 2009 -3- by the Company Law Board and not the Bench Officer. The issue as to whether there is evidence to prove the claim of the petitioner is for the Company Law Board to consider and not the Bench Officer. Accordingly Ext.P7 is quashed. The Bench Officer of the Company Law Board is directed to register the petition and place the same before the Company Law Board for appropriate orders. I make it abundantly clear that, I have not considered any of the contentions of the parties on merits and all contentions are left open to be agitated by the parties before the Company Law Board. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/