Clb Helps Gillette Out Of Hlm Feud
The Company Law Board (CLB) has relieved shaving major Gillette International from being impleaded in the family feud of Harbanslal Malhotra and Sons (HLM), manufacturer of Topaz blades.
CLB has, in its interim order, stated that with Gillette having no current or pending agreement regarding supply of technology to Harbanslal Malhotra as such, the ground on which applicant (Gillette) can be impleaded no longer exists.
The global shaving major was involved in a suit after R K Malhotra, a shareholder in HLM, charged Gillette with supplying obsolete technology to the company. Gillette International had planned to have a maximum of 49 per cent stake in HLM along with the supply of technology to manufacture blades in 1995. In this regard, the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) had also approved Gillette's proposal to have stake up to 49 per cent in HML. During that period R K Malhotra, one of the three brothers owing 33 per cent stake in the company, objected to the tie-up. Following the family trouble and expiry of FIPB permission in October last for investment in the company, Gillette decided to move out of the tie-up. CLB's principal bench comprising Justice P K Majumdar and S Balasubramaniam in their interim order stated: "As Gillette has not sought further extension from FIPB along with no commitment or interest in HLM, there in no need for it to be impleaded."
CLB decided to relieve Gillette in the case after the shaving major filed an application to the board making clear its intention in the case.
In its application before CLB, Gillette stated that since the validity of the approval by FIPB has lapsed and the matter of any extension of such approval is not being proceeded, it is neither necessary nor proper to continue Gillette as a respondent in the case.
CLB had included Gillette as respondent in the case in order to check whether the allegations made by R K Malhotra of providing obsolete technology to HLM was correct or not.
The board has said: "this allegation cannot be adjudicated without hearing Gillette".
R K Malhotra, youngest of three Malhotra brothers, had filed a petition against HLM before CLB for alleged mismanagement and oppression in the affairs of the company under section 397/398 of the Companies Act.