Ananda Marga Pracaraka Samgha Ltd v Tomar (No 6) [2013] FCA 284

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Ananda Marga Pracaraka Samgha Ltd v Tomar (No 6) [2013] FCA 284 Citation: Ananda Marga Pracaraka Samgha Ltd v Tomar (No 6) [2013] FCA 284

Parties: ANANDA MARGA PRACARAKA SAMGHA LTD (ACN 003 193 897), DEVENDHRAN VADIVELOO PILLAY and PRABANJAMURTHI PILLAI v SUNIL KUMAR SINGH TOMAR, CLAUDIA ALISTER, RICHARD PFEIFFER, TIWARI DAYASHANKAR, PAUL ALISTER, DIETER DAMBIEC, JAKE KARLYLE, LUKE DEACON, MIRAI DEACON, MICHAEL TOWSEY and DHARANENDRAN PARTHY

File number: VID 208 of 2010

Judge: DODDS-STREETON J

Date of judgment: 3 April 2013

Catchwords: CORPORATIONS – Company limited by guarantee – objects include "to propagate the ideals, the philosophy and practice" of the Ananda Marga religion – all members typically directors – worldwide schism in Ananda Marga movement and emergence of two competing central administrations in Ranchi and Kolkata, India – company's board resolves not to follow without scrutiny any directives of central administration – dispute over identity of members of company – defendants resolve to remove plaintiff directors – defendants allege membership of plaintiffs and their associates in breach of corporate objects and implied terms of constitution due to loss of good standing with Ranchi administration – whether membership of plaintiffs and their associates terminated - construction of company's constitution – whether Ranchi administration and office holders hold legitimate authority in Ananda Marga – whether plaintiffs and their associates deprived of good standing in Ananda Marga – whether plaintiffs and their associates members of company – whether third to eleventh defendants members of company. CORPORATIONS – Oppression – s 232 of Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) – whether plaintiffs' membership or control of company contrary to the legitimate expectations of members and purposes of incorporators – whether plaintiffs withheld financial information from first defendant or held meetings on short notice. CORPORATIONS – whether just and equitable to wind company up – ss 233 and 461(1)(k) of Act – whether failure of company's substratum – whether deadlock – whether practically impossible for company to carry out its activities due to bifurcated board and incapacity to identify members – effect of multiple contraventions of Act – whether alternative to winding up.