| In the case of Daewoo Motors India Ltd, the agency will need a permission from the Delhi High Court before resuming its inquiry. |
| While the stay order for the DSQ Software case was given by the Chennai High Court on November 7, 2003, that for Design Auto Ltd was served by the Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High court on January 16 this year. |
| The stays have been issued on the ground that the department of company affairs failed to comply with the requirements under Section 234 of the Companies Act, which calls for the issuance of a notice to a company before initiating any action against it. |
| SFIO had been entrusted the Design Autosystems case last month itself and a stay means mean a delay in proceedings against Bonanza Biotech also. Both were allegedly involved in fraudulently issuing Rs 100 crore worth shares to each other in 2002. |
| SFIO officials, however, said this was a minor problem that could be solved by issuing the requisite documents and added that the delay would not be much. SFIO was at preliminary stages of investigation in both the cases. |
| In another development, the Delhi High Court has appointed a liquidator for Daewoo Motors India Ltd on the basis of a petition filed by the Paris-based bank, Societe General de Paris, which had dues amounting to Rs 6 crore. |
| "This is unlikely to impact our work and the office's investigations will continue as usual," an SFIO official said. |
| SFIO will proceed in its case against Ketan Parekh once the Company Law Board decides whether investigations were required. |
Jinxed beginning
|
Top Section
Explore Business Standard