9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 1306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 2(55) of the Companies Act, 2013, then every member may need or file such application, at any stage of the proceedings and the main petition may not see the light of the day ever. There is not even a whisper about any instance/incident/any document to show that non-joinder of the present applicant will prejudice the rights of the proposed petitioner or will prejudice the adjudication of the petition. The petition is filed in the year 2016 whereas the impleadment is filed in 2020 (though not barred) specially when applicant claims that his membership and/or directorship are of 2007-08 and after rounds of litigations are upheld in year 2014. So at the time of filing of present petition in 2016, the same could have been consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce before the Court may be necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit, be added. 3. Reliance is placed by the applicant of Order I Rule 10(2) of Code of Civil Procedure which empowers to order at any stage of the proceedings, with or without application of either party, to strike off the name of any party improperly joined (which is not the case here) and add name of any person who ought to have been joined (in the present case name of the applicant as Petitioner No. 7) or whose presence before the Court may be necessary in order to enable the Court to effectually and completely adjudicate all questions involved in the suit (in present case compa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... applicant referred to judgments and orders passed at different stages by various Courts in CP No. 114/2007 reproducing the observations of the Courts with respect to membership/directorship of the applicant proving that the applicant being member and director of the petitioner No. 1-company as on date. b) Denying that the sole purpose of this application is to obstruct application filed by respondents under Section 8 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act. c) Controverting the stand of the respondents that the application is time barred relying on the wordings of Order 1 Rule 10(2) beginning with the Court may at any stage of the proceedings.................. . d) Requesting the Court be pleased ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 07.02.2020. Thus, the issues as mentioned above are again re-filed in the present petition by the petitioner in 2016, where the reply has not yet been filed by any respondents. ii. It is highlighted that Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal had directed in order dated 12.04.2017 while hearing of one of the appeals in CP No. 114/2007 that no fresh application would be filed. The respondents submit that disregarding the directions of the Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, the petitioners' group is indulging in filing various frivolous applications to stall the hearing Of main CP No. 144/2016. iii. The claim of Mr. Vineet Khosla as a shareholder and/or a director is yet to be decided, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the name of parties at any stage of the proceedings, moreso, petition has not travelled a long way. iv. The necessity of joining the applicant as petitioner No. 7 on the ground only that he is a member/director is not acceptable, specially in the proceedings under Section 241-242 of the Companies Act, where any member and/or director, only on the ground of his or her membership, obtains right to join proceedings under Section 241-242 of the Companies Act, 2013. No specific acts or averments of oppression and mismanagement are made with respect to the proposed petitioner No. 7-applicant herein. The petition under Section 241-242 filed by any person qualifying under Section 244 not only decide the rights of the members (even though the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
