IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA COMPANY APPLICATION NO. 90 OF 2009 IN COMPANY APPEAL NO. 12 OF 2009 MORGAN VENTURES LIMITED ... Applicant Versus BLUE COAST HOTELS AND RESORTS LTD AND 17 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. M. S. Sonak, Senior Advocate with Mr. P. S. Rao, Advocate with Mr. Ajeet Shukla, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. S. Dessai Senior Advocate with Mr. Shivan Dessai, Advocate with Mr. R. Srivastava, Advocate with Mr. Pavithran A. V. Advocate for the respondents. Coram:- U. D. SALVI, J. Date:- 18th December, 2009 P.C. Heard. Perused application and the annexures therewith. 2. By order dated 5.10.2009 this Court directed the Company Law board to take up the application no. 226/09 moved for :(a) Directions to the respondent no.1 company to defer its ensuing Annual General Meeting on 30.9.2009; or in the alternative (i) in the event this Hon'ble Board deem fit and appropriate to allow respondent no.1 Company to convene its ensuing Annual General Meeting on 30.9.2009, the respondent no.1 Company be restrained by Order of this Hon'ble Board not to implement any resolution for conversion of preference shares into equity shares; (b) passing an order restraining M/s M. Kamal Mahajan & Company, Chartered Accountants from being appointed as Statutory Auditors of the Company and Mr. I. S. Deo, Company Secretary to verify the balance sheet for the year ending 31.3.2009; (c) passing ad interim ex-parte orders in terms of prayers (a) and (b) above,- for hearing and its disposal according to law within 15days from 7.10.2009. However it appears that the disposal of the said application could not take place for certain intervening circumstances despite the parties being heard particularly due to the arrest of acting chairman and member of Companies Law Board at Delhi. Thereafter it appears the appellant Morgan Venture Limited moved the member of the Companies Law Board, Western Region at Mumbai for expeditious disposal of the said application on 8.12.2009. However clarrification as to whether the said member of the Companies Law Board could take up the hearing of the said application was sought and could be obtained by 10/12/2009. Again this application was mentioned before the member of the Companies Law Board at Mumbai on 11.12.2009 for ad-interim reliefs. As per the oral directions it was placed for hearing on 14.12.2009. It is now the grievance of the appellant that despite urgency in the matter to get its cause heard and disposed off by 31.12.2009, the said application was adjourned to 12.1.2010 and therefore the present application. The respondents have challenged the maintainability of the present application on the ground that this Court had already denied the reliefs and referred the issue to Companies Law Board vide Order dated 5.10.2009. However the respondents have shown willingness without prejudice to their rights and contention in the present application to go before the Companies Law Board Western Region at Mumbai on 22.12.2009 and to co-operate with the appellant for getting its disposal according to the law on or before 31.12.2009. The appellant agree to this suggestion of the respondents. 3. In view of such agreement there is no need to go into the controversy regarding the maintainability of the present application as it would only spoil what could be achieved by the agreement. Hence the Order:- The member of the Companies Law Board Western Region at Mumbai is directed to take up the hearing of C.A. No. 226/2009 for hearing on 22.12.2009. Parties shall remain present before the member of the Companies Law Board Western Region at Mumbai at about 11.00a.m on 22.12.2009 and shall co-operate with the Board for getting the said application heard expeditiously according to law on or before 31.12.2009. The Companies Law Board,Western Region at Mumbai shall decide the said application on or before 31.12.2009. 4. Company Application No.90/2009 is disposed off accordingly. Authenticated copy of this Order shall be furnished to the parties as per usual procedure. U. D. SALVI, J. vn