R.G. Shaw and Co. Ltd. Vs. Shaw Wallace and Co. Ltd. and Others - Court Judgment |
| Company |
| Supreme Court of India |
| Dec-11-1986 |
| Transfer Petition (Civil) Nos. 267-71, Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 9329, 9322 and 11393 of 1 |
| E.S. Venkataramiah and; Sabysaschi Mukharji, JJ. |
| 1986(2)SCALE687; 1986Supp(1)SCC691 |
| R.G. Shaw and Co. Ltd. |
| Shaw Wallace and Co. Ltd. and Others |
.....under sub-clause (a) of clause (4)." section 13 of the maintenance of internal security act, 1971 as amended by s. 6(d) of the defence of india act, 1971 enacts that the "maximum period for which any person may be detained in pursuance of any detention order which has been confirmed under s. 12 shall be twelve months from the date of detention or until the expiry of the defence of india act, 1971, whichever is later." pursuant to an order of detention passed by the government of west bengal the petitioners were detained under s. 13 of the maintenance of internal security act, 1971. in a petition under art. 32 of the constitution it was contended (i) that the parliament was bound to prescribe the maximum period of detention under art. 22(7) (b) of the constitution in order that the provision of art. 22 (4) (a) might operate and is s. 13 of the act, as amended, did not prescribe the maximum period of detention, the confirmation of detention orders in terms of sec. 13 of the act was bad; (ii) that since the determination of the period of detention, namely. the expiry of the defence of india act, 1971 is depending upon the requirement of the proclamation of emergency, the period.....order1. we have heard learned counsel for the parties. we are of the view that the reports submitted by the chairman of the meetings should be accepted and the resolutions passed at the meetings should be given effect to. we accordingly do so.2. the board as constituted after the election will take charge of the affairs of the company and discharge its duties in accordance with law. it is open to the reconstituted board to co-opt any person in accordance with law for the purpose of managing the affairs of the company.3. this order should not be construed as affecting the rights of the parties with regard to the ownership of the shares.4. these matters are disposed of accordingly.
ORDER
1. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. We are of the view that the reports submitted by the Chairman of the Meetings should be accepted and the resolutions passed at the Meetings should be given effect to. We accordingly do so.
2. The Board as constituted after the election will take charge of the affairs of the Company and discharge its duties in accordance with law. It is open to the reconstituted Board to co-opt any person in accordance with law for the purpose of managing the affairs of the Company.
3. This order should not be construed as affecting the rights of the parties with regard to the ownership of the shares.
4. These matters are disposed of accordingly.