Grounds available with the Minority Shareholders to raise issues with the Company’s Mangement/Majority Shareholders

CASE LIST

Dishonest disposal of the company’s properties and non-crediting of the proceeds thereof in the accounts of the company
  1. B.M. Bajoria vs. Union of India and Ors.[1]
Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property [S. 420 read with S. 120(B) of IPC]
  1. S.C. Chaddha and Ors. vs. State of Delhi[2]
  2. S.P. Gupta and Ors. vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.[3]
Deceitful procurement of funds and clever siphoning off of company’s funds by creation of forged documents
  1. S.C. Chaddha and Ors. vs. State of Delhi[4]
  2. S.P. Gupta and Ors. vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.[5]
Criminal breach of trust [S. 406 read with S. 120(B) of IPC]
  1. S.P. Gupta and Ors. vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.[6]
  2. S.K. Alagh vs. State of U.P. and Ors.[7]
Dishonest or fraudulent removal or concealment of property [S. 424 read with S. 120(B) of IPC]
  1. S.P. Gupta and Ors. vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.[8]
Forgery of valuable security, will, etc. [S. 467 read with S. 120(B) of IPC]
  1. S.P. Gupta and Ors. vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.[9]
Falsification of accounts/publishing of false balance sheet [S. 477A read with section 120B of IPC]
  1. S.P. Gupta and Ors. vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.[10]
  2. Gopala Pillai vs. Registrar of Companies[11]
Fraudulent and illegal allotment of equity shares in name of themselves, relatives and family members without contributing any cash
  1. S.P. Gupta and Ors. vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.[12]
Bogus expenditure shown in the books of accounts
  1. S.P. Gupta and Ors. vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr.[13]

 

[1] [1972]42CompCas338(Delhi)

[2] MANU/DE/8449/2007

[3] [2006]132CompCas402(Delhi)

[4] MANU/DE/8449/2007

[5] [2006]132CompCas402(Delhi)

[6] [2006]132CompCas402(Delhi)

[7] AIR2008SC1731

[8] [2006]132CompCas402(Delhi)

[9] [2006]132CompCas402(Delhi)

[10] [2006]132CompCas402(Delhi)

[11][1960] 30 Comp.Cas.272(Ker.); RoC is competent to prefer a complaint against a director of the Company for such offence.

[12] [2006]132CompCas402(Delhi)

[13] [2006]132CompCas402(Delhi)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s