Applicant Impleaded in Appeal for Forgery Allegations: Amendments & Timeline Set

The Tribunal allowed the impleadment of the Applicant in the main appeal to address allegations of forgery and fraud comprehensively. The Tribunal directed necessary amendments to the appeal documents and set a timeline for submissions and rejoinders, with further proceedings scheduled for 20.10.2021.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Impleadment of the Applicant in the main appeal.
2. Allegations of forgery and fraud by the Appellant.
3. Validity of the share transfer and related documents.
4. Previous dismissal of claims by NCLT, Kolkata.
5. Adjudication of the Appellant's claims and the Tribunal's directions.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Impleadment of the Applicant in the Main Appeal
The Applicant, claiming to be the original allottee of 150 shares of the First Respondent (M/s. ITC Ltd.), sought to be impleaded in the main appeal (Comp. App. (AT) No. 61 of 2020) to defend his interest against the Appellant (M/s. Singhal Finstock (P) Ltd.). The Applicant argued that the shares were being claimed by the Appellant through forged documents. The Tribunal allowed the impleadment of the Applicant, recognizing the necessity to make out a prima facie case for such impleadment to secure the ends of justice.

Issue 2: Allegations of Forgery and Fraud by the Appellant
The Applicant alleged that the Appellant, through its Director, had committed forgery and fraud to claim the shares. The Applicant detailed instances of alleged forgery, including discrepancies in the dates and details of the share transfer documents, and the involvement of the Appellant's family members and employees in creating bogus documents. The Tribunal noted these allegations but emphasized that the merit(s) of these claims would be adjudicated in the main proceedings.

Issue 3: Validity of the Share Transfer and Related Documents
The Applicant contended that the share transfer documents were invalid and incomplete, lacking proper endorsements and stock exchange validation. The Appellant argued that the First Respondent (ITC) had no authority to withhold the transfer of shares when the documents lodged by ICCM were found valid. The Tribunal acknowledged the conflicting claims but deferred the final determination to the main appeal.

Issue 4: Previous Dismissal of Claims by NCLT, Kolkata
The Appellant's claims had previously been dismissed by the NCLT, Kolkata, on 05.12.2019. The Appellant argued that the Applicant had suppressed the fact that he was an intervenor in the NCLT proceedings and that his claims were dismissed. The Tribunal noted this history but allowed the Applicant's impleadment to ensure a comprehensive adjudication of all issues.

Issue 5: Adjudication of the Appellant's Claims and the Tribunal's Directions
The Tribunal emphasized that an appeal is a continuation of the original proceedings and that the presence of the Applicant was necessary for a complete adjudication of the issues. The Tribunal directed the Registry to amend the main appeal to include the Applicant as the second Respondent and allowed the Applicant to file his Reply/Response. The Appellant was directed to serve the requisite materials to the Applicant's counsel and was granted liberty to file a rejoinder.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the impleadment of the Applicant in the main appeal, recognizing the necessity to address the allegations of forgery and fraud comprehensively. The Tribunal directed the necessary amendments to the appeal documents and set a timeline for the submission of responses and rejoinders. The case was listed for further proceedings on 20.10.2021.

---