Belated impleadment and amendment in long-pending company proceedings may be refused where repeated interlocutory filings abuse process.

Belated impleadment and amendment applications in a long-pending company petition were declined because the proposed parties and relevant developments had been available for a long time, yet no timely steps were taken. The Tribunal treated the extraordinary delay as decisive, held that the applications lacked valid justification at that stage, and noted that interlocutory proceedings could not be used to obtain declaratory relief. It further observed that repeated interlocutory filings amounted to an abuse of process. On that basis, the refusal to allow impleadment and amendment was upheld and the appeal was not admitted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refusal to allow impleadment and amendment applications filed at a belated stage in a long-pending company petition called for interference in appeal.

Analysis: The appeal arose from orders rejecting impleadment and amendment applications on the ground that the proposed parties and subsequent developments had been available for a long time, yet no timely steps were taken. The Tribunal noted the extraordinary delay in the company petition and held that the applications were moved without valid reason at a late stage. It also observed that the attempt to seek declaratory relief through an interlocutory application was impermissible and that repeated interlocutory filings amounted to abuse of process. In view of the prolonged pendency and the reasons recorded by the Tribunal below, no interference was warranted.

Conclusion: The refusal to permit impleadment and amendment at the belated stage was upheld, and the appeal was not admitted.

---