1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION jmi CONTEMPT PETITION (L) NO. 4 OF 2009 IN COMPANY APPEAL NO. 31 OF 2009 IN COMPANY PETITION NO.104 OF 2007. In the matter of Hotel Maredias Pvt. Ltd. Mrs. Shakeela Sultan Maredia & Anr. ..Petitioners (Org. Appellants) v/s. Hotel Maredias Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ..Respondents. .... Mr. Hiten Venegaonkar, a/w. Roopesh Jaiswal, i/b. Jaiswal & Associates, for Petitioners. Mr. H. Toor, i/b. D.S. Patil, for Respondent Nos. 3, 4 & 6. Mr. B.B. Parekh, for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2. .... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. DATE : 4TH FEBRUARY 2010. P.C. The contempt petition is filed by the petitioners who are the original appellants in company appeal no.31 of 2009 filed before this Court under section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956. The said contempt petition was disposed of by an order of this Court dated 8th May 2009, wherein the respondents agreed to give inspection of all the documents as may be requisitioned by 2 the appellants, which may be relevant for assessing the valuation of shares including the books of accounts and the balance sheet for the relevant period. It was agreed that the inspection shall be given within two weeks from the date of such requisition. 2. As can be seen from the order passed by the Company Law Board dated 13th August 2007, the valuation of the shares was to be done as on 31st March 2007. The relevant period therefore, cannot be beyond 31st March 2007. However, the appellants by their letter dated 12th May 2009 sought inspection of the documents inter-alia for the period beyond 31st March 2007. The inspection as sought for by the appellants was therefore, disputed by the respondents. In my view, the respondents were therefore, justified in contending that the appellants were not entitled to inspection as sought and therefore, it cannot be held that the respondents have willfully disobeyed the order of this Court dated 8th May 2009. 3. However, the learned Advocate for the appellants submits that the appellants will not insist for inspection of documents beyond 31st March 2007. The learned Advocate for the respondents states on instructions that the respondents will have no objection in complying with the said order dated 8th May 2009, 3 if a fresh requisition as per the order dated 8th May 2009 is submitted by the appellants. It is also stated by the learned Advocate appearing for the respondents on instructions that the respondents will pay monthly remuneration of the appellant no.1 till date, within a period of two weeks from today. The said statements are accepted. 4. The contempt petition is accordingly, disposed of. Parties to act upon an ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate of this Court. [ S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. ]