TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 594
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... inherent powers under Rule 11 and 51 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, grant liberty to withdraw the Company Petition, and file it afresh after correcting the same within 3 days of the withdrawal, while sustaining all status quo orders for one week from the date of allowing withdrawal. In the alternative to (1): 2) Allow the present application ex parte, and in consequence thereof, allow the amended Company Petition as per Annexure 1 to be taken on record, to substitute the Company Petition filed on 13-08-2007. 3) If the amendment of the Company Petition be allowed ex parte, direct or hold that the approval of the filing of the amended petition does not constitute the endorsement/ adjudication by this Hon'ble Tribunal of the correctness o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of "Legal submissions or summations", 2 instances of "Addition of Respondents (Ord 1 R 10)" 1 instance of "Revised reliefs", 6 instances of "Amendments on shareholding" and 1 instance of "Deletion of what is factually incorrect". In the same summary of amendments, the Applicant has further submitted meanings of the legends being used e.g. "enlargement," "factually correct and already expressed," "discovery of new matter", "correction of already accepted/allowed" and "addition of respondents, etc." 3. Admittedly, the Applicant wants 11 types or categories of amendments/enlargements, of which the number of instances, where these amendments/enlargements occur, runs into 108 such instances of amendments being proposed. 4. During the arguments....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to 4 and 6 to 8 sought liberty to make legal submissions limited to maintainability of present application for amendment. The Respondents were allowed to assist the court with respect to legal propositions involved in the present application and no submissions with respect to facts were allowed from the Respondents. 6. Both sides had requested and were permitted to file written submissions and Respondents have filed five judgments in support of their contentions that the application cannot be entertained in law based on principles of law, as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court while considering, allowing/rejecting amendments. The following illustrative factors were discussed which are not exhaustive:- (I) whether the amendment sought....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anagement of Respondent No.1 Company, the Respondent No. 1 Company M/s. Montreaux Resorts Pvt. Ltd. through present Applicant has filed another petition against the same Respondents in 2016 U/S. 241-242 of the Companies Act, 2013 for acts of oppression and mismanagement, wherein an application seeking interim relief is pending consideration before this Bench, admittedly with parallel/similar prayers against the same Respondents. 9. On overall view of the entire scenario amongst the parties, litigations pending, issues involved, and also long pendency of present main petition, wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court and Hon'ble NCLAT have categorically directed NCLT to ensure an early disposal of the present main petition No. 114/2007, in our....