9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 81 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyOriginal allottee of shares - fraud played by the appellant or not - prime stand of the Appellant is that the balance sheet(s) does/do not make mention of the said shares or so called 'Sale Deed' with M/s. IC Capital Markets since in the year ending 31.03.2002 to 31.3.2018 - HELD THAT - This Tribunal taking note of the attendant facts and circumstances of the instant case in a conspectus and holistic fashion and keeping in mind yet another fact that the Appellant has preferred the instant Appeal Comp.App.(AT) No. 61 of 2020, (which is a continuation of original proceedings) i.e. Appl. No. CP(App)963/KB/2018 on the file of NCLT, Kolkata Bench dated 05.12.2019, this Tribunal comes to a resultant conclusion that IA No. 260/2021 filed by the Appellant is to be allowed and accordingly the I.A. No. 260/2021 is allowed, to secure the ends of justice. The Intervenor/Appellant is arrayed as newly added party (i.e. as second Respondent) in the main Comp.App.(AT) No. 61 of 2020 and by virtue of his impleadment is permitted to file his Reply/Response as the case may be, to the main Company Appeal - The 'Office of the Registry' is directed to List the matter on 20.10.2021.
Issues Involved:
1. Impleadment of the Applicant in the main appeal. 2. Allegations of forgery and fraud by the Appellant. 3. Validity of the share transfer and related documents. 4. Previous dismissal of claims by NCLT, Kolkata. 5. Adjudication of the Appellant's claims and the Tribunal's directions. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Impleadment of the Applicant in the Main Appeal The Applicant, claiming to be the original allottee of 150 shares of the First Respondent (M/s. ITC Ltd.), sought to be impleaded in the main appeal (Comp. App. (AT) No. 61 of 2020) to defend his interest against the Appellant (M/s. Singhal Finstock (P) Ltd.). The Applicant argued that the shares were being claimed by the Appellant through forged documents. The Tribunal allowed the impleadment of the Applicant, recognizing the necessity to make out a prima facie case for such impleadment to secure the ends of justice. Issue 2: Allegations of Forgery and Fraud by the Appellant The Applicant alleged that the Appellant, through its Director, had committed forgery and fraud to claim the shares. The Applicant detailed instances of alleged forgery, including discrepancies in the dates and details of the share transfer documents, and the involvement of the Appellant's family members and employees in creating bogus documents. The Tribunal noted these allegations but emphasized that the merit(s) of these claims would be adjudicated in the main proceedings. Issue 3: Validity of the Share Transfer and Related Documents The Applicant contended that the share transfer documents were invalid and incomplete, lacking proper endorsements and stock exchange validation. The Appellant argued that the First Respondent (ITC) had no authority to withhold the transfer of shares when the documents lodged by ICCM were found valid. The Tribunal acknowledged the conflicting claims but deferred the final determination to the main appeal. Issue 4: Previous Dismissal of Claims by NCLT, Kolkata The Appellant's claims had previously been dismissed by the NCLT, Kolkata, on 05.12.2019. The Appellant argued that the Applicant had suppressed the fact that he was an intervenor in the NCLT proceedings and that his claims were dismissed. The Tribunal noted this history but allowed the Applicant's impleadment to ensure a comprehensive adjudication of all issues. Issue 5: Adjudication of the Appellant's Claims and the Tribunal's Directions The Tribunal emphasized that an appeal is a continuation of the original proceedings and that the presence of the Applicant was necessary for a complete adjudication of the issues. The Tribunal directed the Registry to amend the main appeal to include the Applicant as the second Respondent and allowed the Applicant to file his Reply/Response. The Appellant was directed to serve the requisite materials to the Applicant's counsel and was granted liberty to file a rejoinder. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the impleadment of the Applicant in the main appeal, recognizing the necessity to address the allegations of forgery and fraud comprehensively. The Tribunal directed the necessary amendments to the appeal documents and set a timeline for the submission of responses and rejoinders. The case was listed for further proceedings on 20.10.2021.
|
