✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court · 29 Dec 2003

Sri Gummadi Venkateswarlu, Ex-Managing Director v. Rama Rao

Company Application No. 109 of 20003 min read

Case at a glance

Decided
29 Dec 2003

Provisions considered

Judgment

1.

Sri Gummadi Venkateswarlu, Ex-Managing Director, S/o. G. Kotaiah, Near Andhra Kesari College, Nirmal Nagar, Ongole, Prakasam District.

2.

Dr. Vedurmudi Rayappa Pantulu, S/o. V. Rama Rao, 519-D, Road No. 28, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad-500034.

3.

Sri Nedunuri Venkata Satya Sesha Suryanarayana Rao, Near Jayaram Talkies, Raja Panagal Road, Ongole, Prakasam District.

4.

Sri Krishnaswamy Gopalan, S/o. V. Krishnaswamy, C-8, Akshay, Sri Swamy Samrath Nagar, Mumbai-58.

5.

Sri Venkata Rama Rao Josyula, S/o. J. Suryanarayana, Sothapet, Ongole, Prakasam District.

6.

Sri Srinivasan Ethiraja, S/o. K.G. Ethiraju Reddy, 37-1-420 (C ), II Lane, Ramnagar, Ongole-523001, Prakasam District. … Accused Application under Section 454 (5) and (5A) of the Companies Act, 1956 and Rules 125 and 132 of the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 praying that in the circumstances stated in the compliant filed by the Official Liquidator the High Court may be pleased to i. Summon the accused herein and to punish them under sub- Section (5) and (5A) of Section 454 of the Companies Act, 1956 for non-Compliance with the requirements of Section 454 of the Companies Act, 1956; ii. Order the cost of this application to come out of the funds of the company; Whereas the Court upon perusing the Application and the complaint filed by the Official Liquidator along with Judge’s summons filed herein and the order of the High Court dated: 20-02-2006 made herein and upon hearing the arguments of Sri M. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the Official Liquidator for the Applicants, who seeks time to adduce evidence observed that Accused 1 and 2 are present in Court. Since summons issued to accused 3 to 6 has been returned unserved; And whereas and accused 1 and 2 have already been examined under Section 251 Cr.P.C., the Court directed the Registry to issue Warrants of arrest against the Accused 3 to 6 for their arrest and production before this Court on 27-08-2007; ..2.. Therefore you viz; The Commissioner of Police, Mumbai City, Mumbai, Maharashtra State. are hereby directed to arrest the said Accused No. 4 namely; Sri Krishnaswamy Gopalan, S/o. V. Krishnaswamy, C-8, Akshay, Sri Swamy Samrath Nagar, Mumbai-58, wherever he is found and produce him bodily under safe custody and conduct before this Hon`ble Court on 27-08-2007 at 10. 30.a.m., to which date the case stands posted. You are further directed to execute the Warrant without fail and to return the same as early as possible preferably on or before the said date 27-08-2007 to this Court with a detailed report stating the manner in which it has been executed. Herein fail not. JOINT REGISTRAR To

1. The Commissioner of Police, Mumbai City, Mumbai, Maharashtra State (BY RPAD with a copy of petition and affidavit)

2. T h e Official Liquidator, 3-5-398, 1st Floor, Kendriya Sadan, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad. (BY SPECIAL MESSENGER)

3. The Section Officer, O.S. Section, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad 4. One spare copy. Ksv Ksv Date of drafting: 10-08-2007 HIGH COURT RRJ DATE: 07-08-2007 NOTE: POST ON 27-08-2007 WARRANTS AGAINST ACCUSED No. 4 C.A. NO. 109 OF 2000 IN C.P. NO. 84 of 1996

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Companies Act, 2013 — s. 454; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 251.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 29 Dec 2003.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Company Application No. 109 of 2000). ← Search more judgments