On May 16, 2024, a Single Judge issued an injunction that has since prompted the 2nd defendant, the Chairman, to file applications for its vacation. The defendants, except for the 1st and 7th, have legal representation. Various objections have been raised, notably questioning the plaintiff's standing to bring the suit. While the Companies Act of 2013 allows shareholders to approach the National Company Law Tribunal, the plaintiff argues that as an independent director, he possesses the right to seek relief in this court.

The court recognizes this argument as significant and suggests that addressing the issue of maintainability is essential before delving into other matters, particularly concerning the 2nd defendant’s right to manage the bank account. This point is further complicated by the fact that the 2nd defendant was appointed Managing Director by the shareholders.

An additional layer to this case involves the ongoing development of land owned by the 1st defendant, which is currently under scrutiny by an Arbitral Tribunal. The immediate catalyst for the lawsuit appears to be the transfer of ?100 crores, raising questions about the rights associated with operating the bank account in light of this substantial financial movement.

While the plaintiff seems to advocate for the 5th defendant’s interests, it is important to note that the April 30 resolution does not question the 5th defendant’s right to operate the account. It simply introduces the 3rd and 4th defendants into the operational framework.

The court has emphasized the need for a thorough examination of all relevant issues while underscoring the importance of maintaining the injunction until the next hearing on June 7, 2024. Until that date, the 5th defendant is allowed to operate the bank account, but must exercise caution, ensuring that transactions are strictly for legitimate company expenses.

The court has also instructed the 5th defendant to provide a detailed statement of issued cheques, covering only immediate company obligations, by the upcoming hearing date. All parties have been directed to file counters and exchange copies of necessary documents ahead of the June session, where arguments will continue regarding the maintainability of the suit and the rights of all involved parties concerning the bank account operations. In summary, this case illustrates the complexities of corporate governance and the legal intricacies that can arise when family members are involved in business management, highlighting the essential balance between operational authority and legal oversight in corporate entities.