Impleadment in company petitions requires specific pleadings and amendment before a party can be added as a respondent.

Impleadment in a company petition requires clear pleadings showing why the proposed party is a necessary party, and the petition must be correspondingly amended if a case is sought to be made against that person. Where the challenge was confined to specified impugned allotments and the impleadment application gave no particulars explaining the appellant's role, the application was treated as vague and the order adding her as a respondent was unsustainable. The impleadment order was set aside because the existing pleadings did not validly support her joinder.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant could be impleaded as a respondent in the company petition without any amendment to the petition or sufficient pleadings showing that she was a necessary party.

Analysis: The challenge in the company petition had been restricted to specific impugned allotments in favour of the petitioner and certain original respondents. The impleadment application did not explain with particulars why the appellant was a necessary party, and no corresponding amendment was sought in the company petition to disclose any case against her. On that footing, the impleadment application was held to be vague and the order adding her as a respondent was found unsustainable as against her.

Conclusion: The appellant could not validly be impleaded as a respondent on the basis of the existing pleadings, and the order impleading her was set aside.

---