Mangalam Publications (India) Pvt. Ltd vs Toshma Biju Varghese

Comp App (AT) (CH) No.40/2024 Page 1 of 4 4. Sabu Varghese, S/o M.C. Varghese, Mangalapally House, Ancheril, Gandhinagar P.O., Kottayam - 686 008

5. Dr. Saji Varghese, S/o M.C. Varghese, Mangalapally House, Kumaranalloor P.O., Kottayam - 686 016

6. Biju Varghese, S/o M.C Varghese, Mangalappally House, Devalokam, P.O., Kottayam - 686 004

7. Registrar of Companies, Company Law Bhavan, BMC Road, Thrikkakara P.O., Kakkanad Kochi - 682 030 Kerala ...Respondents

Present : For Appellant : Mr. Ashok B. Shenoy, Advocate

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

30.07.2024:

The Appellant in this Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 40 / 2024, is the

Respondent No. 1 in CP (C /Act) / 13 / KOB / 2024, before NCLT, Kochi Bench.

He expresses his grievances being aggrieved as against the Order dated

26.06.2024 of NCLT, Kochi Bench, impugned in the instant Appeal. His

Comp App (AT) (CH) No.40/2024 Page 2 of 4 grievances are that by the virtue of the Impugned Order he and Respondent Nos.

3, 4 & 5 have been restrained from acting as Board of Directors of the Appellant

Company and from representing the Company in any manner including any

further liability of any nature whatsoever in relation to the Appellant Company.

2. The learned Counsel for the Appellant has pleaded and has argued too, that

the Impugned Order does not justify the test of grant of injunction as provided

with the proceedings contained under Order XXXIX of C.P.C. But, be that as it

may at this stage, we are not venturing into the issue.

3. The Appellant submits that by the Impugned Order, the Company

operations are severely restricted, because of the grant of Injunction Order against

the Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 therein and the Appellant company being a prominent

publishing house, this will have severe consequences over the business of the

Company, putting at stake the livelihood of over 200 direct employees and 300

indirect employees.

4. It is seen that NCLT by the Impugned Order has granted only an interim

relief till the next date of Hearing. The interim relief applications and orders too,

invariably in all the proceedings are only in the form of an interim arrangement

made, to safeguard the interests of the parties who are already under litigation.

Seen from that angle, if the Appellant contends that his operational activities are

being curtailed or obstructed by the Impugned Order of 26.06.2024, the

appropriate procedural recourse available to the Appellant, would be to file an

Comp App (AT) (CH) No.40/2024 Page 3 of 4 appropriate clarification or modification application before the NCLT, Kochi

Bench, Kochi and to seek clarification to the Order under challenge herein,

because, otherwise the interim order is only an interlocutory order for the time

being.

5. If the Appellant does so, by filing an Application for clarification within a

period of one week from today, the learned Adjudicating Authority / National

Company Law Tribunal, Kochi Bench, Kochi, is requested to decide the aforesaid

clarification Application of the Appellant as expeditiously as possible, preferably

within a period of 4 weeks thereafter.

Subject to the aforesaid, this Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 40 / 2024 is

closed for the time being. The connected pending Interlocutory Applications, if

any, would also stand closed.

[Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial)

[Jatindranath Swain] Member (Technical) SR/TM

Comp App (AT) (CH) No.40/2024 Page 4 of 4