SNDP Yogam Leaders File High Court Appeal Against Disqualification Ruling
In a significant legal development, SNDP Yogam general secretary Vellappally Natesan and his son Thushar Vellappally, the vice president of the organization, have approached the Kerala High Court with an appeal. This move challenges a judgment from a single bench that disqualified them from holding their posts in the Yogam and declared their offices vacant due to violations of the Companies Act, 2013.
Bench to Hear Appeal on Tuesday
A bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice V M Syam Kumar is scheduled to consider this appeal on Tuesday. The original judgment highlighted two key violations by the office-bearers of SNDP Yogam, leading to their disqualification.
The first violation noted was under Section 152(3) of the Companies Act, 2013, which mandates that no person shall be appointed as a director of a company unless they possess a director identification number (DIN). The second point involved SNDP Yogam's failure to file annual accounts and returns from 2006-07 to 2016-17 until September 2020, as required under Section 274(1)(g) of the Companies Act, 1956, later replaced by Section 164(2) of the Companies Act, 2013.
Since the returns were not filed for three consecutive years, the directors had attracted disqualification from 2009 onwards, according to the court's findings.
Appellants Challenge Jurisdiction and Maintainability
In their appeal, Natesan and Thushar have raised several contentions against the single bench's judgment. They argue that the petitions leading to their disqualification were not maintainable, as the dispute relates to the alleged disqualification of directors and the internal management of a company. They assert that such matters fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT).
The appellants rely on Section 430 of the Companies Act, which expressly bars the jurisdiction of civil courts and other forums in matters that the tribunal is empowered to determine. They further cite a division bench judgment that held SNDP Yogam, being a private company, is not amenable to writ jurisdiction and that disputes relating to its internal affairs must be resolved through statutory remedies under company law.
Contesting Directions to Appoint Directors
Additionally, the appellants have challenged the single bench's direction to the state to appoint directors to manage the affairs of the Yogam. They argue that such directions fundamentally alter the administration of the organization and could not have been issued in writ jurisdiction. This is particularly relevant, they contend, when the question of disqualification of directors falls within the statutory jurisdiction of the NCLT.
The appeal emphasizes that the proper legal forum for resolving these issues is the NCLT, not the High Court, and seeks to overturn the disqualification and related orders based on jurisdictional grounds.
