9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (5) TMI 523X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpany including the following: a) The 2nd Respondent has let out the properties of the Company, without any board resolution, in favour of KPS for parking vehicles and for play ground purposes, for a consideration of ₹ 20,000/- per month; and b) FS I is in occupation of the registered office of the company and is operating its activities by using the infrastructure facilities available with the Company. 3. According to Shri V.S. Raju, Advocate, appearing for the applicants, the Company has collected a total sum of ₹ 12 lacs from KPS, by way of ground rent, for a period of 5 years but failed to account the said amount in the books of account of the Company. The 2nd Respondent has misappropriated the entire amount collect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etion which has to be exercised in view of the facts and circumstances of each case and that for factual and complete adjudication of the question involved in the Suit. The presence of a third party, even if it is not necessary, but if proper, should be allowed to be added as a party if applied for. For these reasons, Shri Raju urged that KPS and FS I are required to be impleaded as parties to the proceedings. 4. Shri T.K. Bhaskar, Counsel, appearing for the Respondents while denying the allegations that the Respondents had let out the properties of the Company to KPS for a consideration of ₹ 20,000/- per month, that the Respondents had misappropriated a total sum of ₹ 12 lacs, that FS I is in occupation of the registered off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een sought against the proposed parties in the company petition nor are interests of the proposed parties affected. While Mr. Bhaskar was in agreement with the case laws cited on behalf of the applicants, he pointed out that these case laws are not applicable in the fats and circumstances of the present case, especially when neither KPS nor FS I are necessary or proper parties to the present proceedings. Shri R. Thirunavukarasu and Shri V. John Acquires, Advocates, appearing for the proposed parties have stoutly opposed the application on the ground that the charges levelled against them are far from truth and that they are no necessary parties to the present proceedings. 5. I have considered the arguments of the Learned Counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
