Locus standi and interim relief in company disputes: later-joined applicant failed to show a prima facie case or balance of convenience.

Interim relief was refused because the applicant was not a shareholder when the disputed transactions occurred and acquired association with the company only later, so he lacked locus standi to challenge them for interim purposes. The tribunal also found that no prima facie case or balance of convenience had been established in favour of the applicant. It further directed that no further alienation of the company's assets should take place from the date of the order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, while expressly stating that the observations were only prima facie and would not affect the final decision in the company petition.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant had locus standi to challenge the impugned transactions for the purpose of interim relief, and whether a prima facie case and balance of convenience were made out for grant of such relief.

Analysis: The applicant was found not to have been a shareholder when the disputed transactions took place and had become associated with the company only later. On that basis, he was held not to have locus to question the transactions for interim purposes. The applicant also failed to establish a prima facie case or balance of convenience in his favour for the reliefs sought. The order further recorded that no further alienation of the company's assets should take place from the date of the order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, while making it clear that these observations were only prima facie and would not affect the final decision in the company petition.

Outcome: Interim relief was declined and the application was disposed of.

---