1995 (9) TMI 267

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Amit Agrawal for the Respondent. JUDGMENT A.R. Tiwari, J. - The non-applicant (company) in Company Petition No. 4 of 1988 presented by the respondent seeking relief of winding up of the company, has filed this appeal under section 483 of the Companies Act, 1956, against the order dated September 14, 1990, whereby the application for amendment filed by the respondent, was allowed. Briefly....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ioner (respondent) is not altered. Thus, particulars of the petitioner remain unaltered in the petition pending before the learned company judge and the question of tenability rests on the linchpin of the undernoted averments contained in para. B of the reply submitted by the appellant (who is the respondent in the petition). "The petitioner in this petition has been described as 'Hiralal Mitth....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arable loss is shown to be caused to the other side. It appears from the reply that the objection is still on record. We quote from para. B thus : "That the amendment cannot be allowed to fill up the lacuna of a very serious nature which goes to the root of the case. The original petition being not maintainable, deserves to be dismissed on this ground alone." The question of tenability or ot....