1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. ORDER S.B. Company Application I.A. No.11857/2008 IN S.B. Company Appeal No. 3/2008 Smt. Yogeshwari Kumari vs. Lake Shore Palace & ors. Hotels Pvt. Ltd. & ors. Date of Order:- July 16 ,2010. PRESENT HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA,J. Mr. Sudipto Sarkar, Sr. Advocate with S/Shri Vibhu Bakhru, Mrinal Kanti Mandal,Rahul Sharma, Snehasish Mukherjee, Anjay Kothari and Neeraj Jain for appellant-Applicant. Mr. S.N. Mookharjee, Sr. Advocate with Shri Arun Bhansali for respondent no.1. Mr. M.S. Singhvi and Mr. Ramit Mehta for respondent no.2. Mr. Vikas Balia for respondent No.3. BY THE COURT: The petitioners submitted this Company Application No.11857/08 in S.B.Company Appeal No.3/08 with averment that in view of the observation of the CLB in the impugned order, though the petitioner has challenged the order of the CLB, yet want to withdraw her consent to the appointment of respondent no.3 T.N.Unni as Director of respondent no.1-Company given before this Court in terms of settlement dated 25.8.1999 and memorandum of 2 understanding pursuant to which applications were filed before this Court to withdraw the appeals and the appeals were dismissed by this Court vide order dated 22.10.1999 as withdrawn. This Court after hearing the parties on this Application No.11857/08 observed that though appellant no.1 sought permission to withdraw her consent to the appointment of respondent no.3-T.N. Unni as Director of respondent no.1-Company and that is subject matter in the appeals preferred by the appellant and also by the respondents to challenge the order of the Company Law Board in the main petition, therefore, it will be appropriate to consider the said prayer along with the main appeal itself. The prayer made by the petitioner in this Company Application No.11857/08 submitted in Company Appeal No.3/2008 is misconceived as firstly because of the reason that Shri T.N. Unni was appointed as Director with the consent of the petitioner long ago in view of the settlement dated 25.8.1999 and that has been acted upon in the year 1999 itself and has been submitted before the Division Bench of this Court in earlier round of litigation and in the appeals preferred against the judgment of the learned Single Judge passed in S.B. Company Petition, therefore, by the Division Bench of this Court alone in appropriate application could have passed the appropriate order and that application could have been filed in those decided 3 appeals. The petitioner neither gave her consent to appoint Shri T.N. Unni, a Director before the CLB in present proceedings nor before this Court in appeal/appeals arising out of the order of CLB which is impugned and present proceeding is not continuation of earlier litigation. This Court simply appellate authority over the CLB's order and neither appellate or reviewing authority over the Division Bench's order passed in earlier round of litigation between the same parties. As already observed that the CLB had no jurisdiction to allow the petitioner to withdraw the consent given by her for appointment of Shri T.N. Unni. The same is position in appellate jurisdiction of this Court against the order of CLB. Further the allegation against shri T.N. Unni for his subsequent conduct, i.e. after his appointment as Director in Company are concerned, they cannot invalidate the appointment of Shri T.N. Unni as in the year 1999. Otherwise also on merit while examining the prayer though has not been made by the petitioner of declaring Shri T.N. Unni to be disqualified due to his subsequent conduct to hold the post of Director, this Court found no merit in the allegation, therefore, also the Company Application 11857/08 is liable to be dismissed. Hence dismissed. ( PRAKASH TATIA),J. mlt.