premise that in view of the palpable fraudulent actions of Mr. Arun Kumar
Agarwal, one of the Special Officers who was appointed by an order dated
December 12, 1991 in the liquidation proceedings, which indicated that he
acted solely in his own interest to siphon off the assets of the company (in
liquidation) and become the majority shareholder having controlling
interest in the said company, the interference by the learned Single Judge
was justified. Moreover, it is contended that fraud vitiates all and the
Company Court had ample power to undo whatever wrong was done under
the aegis of a company petition.
7. It is also contended, by placing reliance on certain documents which,
although not a part of the present application, are a part of the records in
the main appeal, that there were several communications and
correspondence issued by the said Mr. Arun Kumar Agarwal, which clearly
go on to show that the said Special Officer abused his office as a Special
Officer and as such, the acts done with the blessings of the orders of this
Court appointing such Special Officer ought to have been undone.