1 S.5406.99.sxw JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SUIT NO. 5406 OF 1999 Girish Nautamal jani & Anr. .. Plaintiffs. V/s. M/s.Linky Hotels & Shopping Spot (P) Ltd. & Ors. ..Defendants. Mr. B.B. Parekh for the Plaintiffs. Ms. Deepti Panda a/w. Khyati Ghevaria i/b. Dhru & Co. for Defendants 2 to 4. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 29th SEPTEMBER 2010. P.C. :- One Mr. Mayur Kothari called upon the Board of Directors of Defendant No.1 to call Extra-ordinary General Meeting by Notice dated 20th April 1999. It was mentioned in the said notice that if Defendant No.1 – Company does not call Extra- ordinary General Meeting, as per the provisions of law, said requisitionist Mr. Mayur Kothari would call the Extra-ordinary General Meeting. It is noted that Defendant No.1 did not call the meeting as per the demand contained in the letter dated 20th April 1999. It appears that said requisitionist called a meeting requisitioning the Extra-ordinary General Meeting of Defendant No.1 on 17th September 1999 by noticed dated 16th August 1999. Explanatory note is attached to the said notice. 2 S.5406.99.sxw 2. This Suit was filed on 15th September 1999 and by prayer clause (a) a declaration is sought that notice dated 20th April 1999 alongwith explanatory note as also notice dated 16th August 1999 alongwith explanatory note issued by said Mr. Mayur Kothari, Defendant No.2 should be declared as null and void and the same be set aside. By prayer clause (b) a order of injunction was sought restraining Defendant No.1 from holding the said meeting. By prayer clause (c) Defendant Nos.2 and 3 were sought to be restrained from taking part in the said meeting. By prayer clause (d) a general prayer was sought that the Resolutions passed in the said meeting should be declared as null and void. 3. The Court is informed by the learned Counsel for the Defendants that application for ad-interim relief in terms of the Motion No. 3016 of 1999 was rejected and meeting was conducted on 17th September 1999 and certain Resolutions have been passed. She also pointed out that after the passing of the said Resolutions, there is no specific challenge to the said Resolutions in the present Suit or in any other litigation. If this is the position, the present Suit which was filed for a limited purpose has come to an end on account of holding of the meeting on 17th September 1999 and the Suit has become infructuous. 4. On hearing this expression, learned Counsel for the Plaintiffs sought time to amend the plaint so as to challenge the said Resolutions. 3 S.5406.99.sxw 5. Learned Counsel for the Defendants opposed the same. 6. In so far as the subject matter of the present Suit is concerned, on account of holding of the meeting on 17th September 1999 and certain Resolutions having been passed, the purpose for which this Suit was filed has come to an end. Since 1999, the Plaintiff have not taken steps to amend the plaint. In my view, as of today, the Suit is infructuous and the same is, therefore, required to be dismissed. 7. Hence, following order is passed :- (i) The Suit is dismissed as it has become infructuous. (ii) There shall be no order as to costs. (R.Y. GANOO, J.)