Amendment to Petition Allowed: Respondents Added, Consent Letters Filed

The Application was allowed, permitting the addition of Respondents No. 5 and 6 and the filing of Consent Letters as part of the main petition. The Tribunal emphasized that the proposed amendments did not alter the cause of action or prejudice the Respondents, and the issue of limitation did not bar the amendments.

---

---

Issues:
1. Whether Respondents No. 5 and 6 can be added as parties in the main petition.
2. Whether the Consent Letters supporting the Petitioner can be filed and considered.

Analysis:

*Issue 1: Adding Respondents No. 5 and 6*
The Tribunal noted that all Directors of the 1st Respondent Company needed to be included as Respondents in the main petition. Respondents No. 5 and 6 were also Directors of the company, and their presence was deemed necessary for deciding the issues involved. Therefore, the original-Petitioner/Applicant was permitted to add them as Respondent No. 5 and Respondent No. 6 in the main petition.

*Issue 2: Filing and Consideration of Consent Letters*
The Applicant filed Consent Letters supporting the petition after the original filing, citing oversight as the reason for not including them initially. The Respondent raised objections regarding the existence and validity of these Consent Letters. However, the Tribunal held that the controversy over the timing of the Consent Letters' existence was not for adjudication in this Application. The proposed Amendment to file the Consent Letters was allowed as it did not change the cause of action or prejudice the Respondents. The issue of compliance with the Companies Act, 1956, and the question of limitation were also addressed. The Tribunal found that the filing of Consent Letters after the petition did not affect the eligibility aspect and allowed the Applicant to file the Consent Letters as part of Exhibit-4.

In conclusion, the Application was allowed, permitting the addition of Respondents No. 5 and 6 and the filing of Consent Letters as part of the main petition. The Tribunal emphasized that the proposed amendments did not alter the cause of action or prejudice the Respondents, and the issue of limitation did not bar the amendments.

---