The Bombay High Court on Friday adjourned the hearing on Invesco’s plea that challenged an order by a single judge bench of the same court directing the foreign institutional investor not to insist on a shareholders’ meeting over alleged corporate governance issues in Zee Entertainment.

The bench of justices SJ Kathawala and Milind Jadhav posted the hearing of Invesco’s plea to November 29, Economic Times reported yesterday.

Invesco, the largest shareholder in Zee Entertainment owning 18 percent of the media company, had approached the Mumbai court on Thursday to challenge the injunction of the single-judge bench.

Representing Invesco, counsel Janak Dwarkadas argued that the interim decision by the single judge would have far-reaching impact.

“The order created three separate groups of companies under the Companies Law: those regulated by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB), listed companies and other companies,” Dwarkadas said.

NCLAT, an appellate tribunal is also hearing a case involving Zee and Invesco.

Earlier this week, the Bombay High Court had temporarily restrained Zee Entertainment Enterprises’ top investor Invesco from calling a shareholder meeting, in a win for the TV network even as the media company, founded by Subhash Chandra almost 29 years back, also cancelled a board meeting slated to be held this week.

American investment firm Invesco wants an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) of shareholders in a bid to oust Zee’s CEO Punit Goenka and suggested that six new independent board members be appointed.

The nomination of individuals for the board does not speak well of their independence, Justice G.S. Patel of the Bombay High Court had observed in his 44-page order earlier this week, adding that Invesco’s notice to remove Goenka “without proposing a replacement… puts Zee into a statutory black hole”, according to a Reuters report.

“Sometimes, it happens that a company must be saved from its own shareholders, however well-intentioned,” Justice Patel had said.

Zee said in a statement had described the court order a big victory for all company stakeholders.