1999 (2) TMI 488 - HC - Companies Law

Summary

Issues:
1. Rejection of the prayer for amendment of the application by the learned single Judge.
2. Consideration of the company application after the disposal of the company petition.
3. Justification of the learned single Judge's decision to reject the application for amendment.
4. Restoration of the company application to file and directions for further proceedings.

Analysis:
1. The High Court considered the appeal seeking to challenge an order passed by a learned single Judge in a Company Application. The applicants had filed a company petition for winding up a company, and a company application was filed for possession of premises pending the winding up petition. The learned single Judge rejected the application for amendment of the company application, which was impugned in the present appeal.

2. The Court noted that the company petition was first disposed of by passing an order for winding up before the company application was considered. The applicants had sought to amend the application, which was pending the hearing and final disposal of the company petition. The Court found that the rejection of the prayer for amendment by the learned single Judge was not justified in the given circumstances.

3. In the Court's view, the learned single Judge should have allowed the amendment of the company application and then proceeded to consider and dispose of it on merits and in accordance with the law. The Court emphasized that since the company petition had been disposed of, the amendment should have been permitted to ensure a fair consideration of the company application.

4. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order, granted the prayer for amendment of the application, and directed the amendment to be carried out within a specified period. The company application was restored to the file, and the learned single Judge was instructed to proceed with hearing and disposing of the company application on merits and in compliance with the law. The appeal was allowed with no order as to costs.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues raised, the Court's reasoning, and the final directions provided by the High Court in response to the appeal challenging the rejection of the application for amendment in the company application proceedings.