Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition
Advocates
Judges
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The court reviewed a report dated 16-1-2005 submitted by Chief Justice (Retd.) V.A. Mohta, who had been appointed as mediator/conciliator under an earlier order dated 11-10-2004. Although the mediator’s “commendable efforts” had not yet resolved the disputes between the parties, the court believed that an amicable solution remained possible. This order therefore continues the mediation process, issues specific directions aimed at overcoming accounting and corporate-governance roadblocks, clarifies an earlier consent order of 12-12-2001 regarding cheque transactions above Rs 10 lakhs, and lists the matter for further review after three months.

Legal Issues Presented

The opinion addresses a procedural matter and does not frame distinct legal issues.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

After examining the mediator’s report and hearing counsel, the court concluded that:

  • The disputes remain unresolved but are still amenable to mediation.
  • The main impediments are the non-finalisation of company accounts and the failure to hold Board meetings.
  • Extending and strengthening the mediator’s mandate will facilitate a comprehensive resolution.
  • Clarifying clause 3(f) of the consent order dated 12-12-2001 is necessary to prevent parties from evading the Rs 10 lakh threshold by splitting single transactions into multiple cheques.

Based on these findings, the court granted the mediator authority to (a) continue conciliation, (b) appoint an independent chartered accountant at the parties’ cost, (c) convene and preside over Board meetings if required, (d) monitor the issuance of cheques and resolve related disputes, and (e) ensure completion of all statutory company records.

Holding and Implications

ORDER: The mediator/conciliator, Shri V.A. Mohta, shall continue mediation under the enhanced directions specified; an independent chartered accountant may be appointed; cheque-issuance procedures are clarified; and the matter is listed after three months.

Implications: The order preserves the prospect of an out-of-court settlement, imposes concrete steps to address accounting and governance issues within the company, and clarifies financial-transaction protocols. No new legal precedent is created; the effect is confined to guiding the ongoing mediation between the parties.

    Rama Narang (3) v. Ramesh Narang And Another

    Order

    1. We have perused the report dated 16-1-2005 received from Chief Justice (Retd.) V.A Mohta, the mediator/conciliator and heard the learned counsel for the parties in the light of the report.

    2. Although the disputes have not been resolved in spite of the commendable efforts made by the learned mediator/conciliator, yet we feel that the possibility of finding out a solution to the disputes between the parties is not totally ruled out. We request Shri V.A Mohta to continue with the proceedings in terms of the order dated 11-10-2004 passed by this Court.

    3. However, to pave the way for a final resolution being found out, we further direct as under:

    (1) In terms of the order dated 11-10-2004, Shri Mohta shall continue to mediate/conciliate and persuade the parties to come to a mutually agreeable solution and failing this he shall, after hearing the parties, suggest a just, equitable and reasonable solution to all the disputes between the parties and report the same to the Court.
    (2) The principal reason for disputes between the parties seems to be non-finalisation of the accounts and non-holding of the Board meetings as indicated by the learned mediator/conciliator in his report dated 16-1-2005. The learned mediator/conciliator may, after hearing the parties, appoint an independent chartered accountant to finalise the accounts by collecting information and seeking clarifications from the parties. The appointment shall be at the cost of the parties. Shri Mohta may also persuade the parties to convene the meetings of the Board of Directors and in case of their failure, may himself convene the meetings keeping in view the convenience of all the parties and may also preside over the meetings in the event of an occasion arising for the purpose.
    (3) By reference to Para 3(f) of the minutes of consent order dated 12-12-2001, we clarify that the amount of Rs 10 lakhs mentioned in that clause refers to a transaction and not to the amount of a cheque; meaning thereby, by splitting up the amount of any transaction in two or more parts the cheques cannot be issued if the amount of any transaction exceeds Rs 10 lakhs. Consistently with that clause, whenever any cheque/cheques is/are required to be signed, one party shall give an advance notice to the other party and in the event of disagreement or dispute the same shall be referred to Shri Mohta for resolution. Lists of cheques with particulars issued by either party with effect from today i.e 25-1-2005, shall be exchanged every fortnight between the parties under copy to the learned mediator/conciliator.
    (4) The learned mediator/conciliator may also take steps for completing all statutory records of the company.

    4. List after three months.

    Court Masters

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Rama Narang (3) v. Ramesh Narang And Another
    (Jan 25, 2005)