Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + AT Companies Law - 2024 (4) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (4) TMI 121 - AT - Companies Law


Issues involved:
The judgment involves issues related to an appeal against an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmadabad Bench, regarding deletion of names of respondents from the array of parties in a main petition under Section 241, 242, and 243 of the Companies Act, 2013, and the imposition of a cost of Rs. 5,00,000/- on the appellant for the respondents' alleged losses.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Deletion of Names of Respondents
The Appellant filed CP No. 46 of 2017 against 'Gangotri Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.' and Respondent No. 2 to 13 under Section 241, 242, and 243 of the Companies Act, 2013. The order of stay against Respondent No. 4 to 8 and 13 was vacated on 18.12.2019. An application was filed to delete their names from the main petition, which was allowed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed the Appellant to file an amended company petition after deletion of names of Respondents No. 4 to 8 and 13 and pay a token amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- to be distributed to them equally. The Appellant challenged the direction to pay the amount, arguing that the respondents were unnecessarily dragged into the litigation and their names were deleted to avoid legal complications. The Court held that the respondents were rightly awarded the amount as they had suffered losses due to being involved in the main petition unnecessarily.

Issue 2: Imposition of Cost
The Tribunal directed the Appellant to pay a token amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- to Respondents No. 4 to 8 and 13 for their alleged losses in business and reputation. The Appellant contended that the imposition of cost was unwarranted as the respondents were initially impleaded in the main petition but later their names were deleted to avoid legal objections. The Court observed that the respondents were unnecessarily involved in the litigation and had to contest the application for two years until the stay was vacated. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to award the amount to the respondents, considering the circumstances of the case and dismissed the appeal without any order as to costs.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates