2019 (12) TMI 293

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....019. The petitioners filed an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the learned Court below for rejection of the plaint on the ground that the same was barred by law. By an order dated November 7, 2019, the application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure was rejected and the application under Order XXIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure filed by the plaintiffs/opposite parties was allowed. Mr. Mitra, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners, submits that the said suit was barred under Section 430 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with Rule 70(5a) of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016. Mr. Mitra elaborated his argument on the basis of Section 58 of the Compani....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fication, the other reliefs claimed in the plaint and the averments made in the plaint read as a whole did not restrict/bar the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. With regard to the point of limitation, it was urged by Mr. Bose, learned Senior Advocate for the opposite parties that the suit squarely falls within the provisions of Section 10 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Next Mr. Bose contends that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action or reliefs claimed which was barred under Section 58 of the Companies Act, 2013. Mr. Bose next submits that with regard to the reliefs claimed in respect of the testamentary disposition, the instant suit was filed prior to institution of the probate suit and in case it transpires in evidence that....