IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY VPH ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMPANY APPEAL No. 13 OF 2009 IN COMPANY PETITION No. 123 OF 2008 Truimph International Finance ... Appellants India Ltd. & Ors. Vs Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. D. D. Madon, Sr. adv ocate a/w Mr. A. H. Delhiwala i/b Rustamji & Jinwala, for the appellant. Mr. C. J. Joy a/w Mr. P. Khosla, for the Respondent. Msk. Jyoti Singh a/w Ms. Mrudula Khodekar, for the respondent No. 1. CORAM: S. J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED: FEBRUARY 27, 2009. P.C.: ---- . Th learned counsel appearing for the appellant is justified in his contention that the application ought not to have been made without notice to the respondents, especially when the facts relied in support thereof pertains to the year 2004. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent was unable to justify making the Application without notice, even before me. The petition itself does not disclose any reason for making the Application without notice. 2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of - 2 - appellants further submits that had notice been given, the applicants would have been in a position to indicate inter-alia that the Company is not managed by the Board of Directors, consisting of one Ketan Parekh by himself or his relatives or employees. He submits that this is clear even from the averments in the petition itself. He also submitted that most of the alleged offences, have been compounded. 3. While an order restraining the Directors from functioning as such has drastic consequences in most cases. I do not intend interfering with the order at this stage, in view of the fact that admittedly no business is being carried on by the Company at present. Further there is no time limit within which the Directors have been ordered to declare their assets and properties. Thus, there would be no prejudice to the appellants if they are directed to avail the remedy of making an application to the Company Law Board from modifying or setting aside the impugned order. It is clarified that if such an Application is made, it will be decided independently till final hearing of the petition. Appeal is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- [ S. J. VAZIFDAR, J.]