TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (2) TMI 1306
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r I, Rule 10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, implead the Applicant, Mr. Vineet Khosla, as Petitioner No. 7 to the present company petition. ii. Pass ex parte orders as prayed for above. iii. And pass such other order or further order or orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. 2. Before going into the merits, the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure needs to be read and for convenience are reproduced herein. Order I Rule 10(2) : Court may strike out or add parties:- The Court may at any stage of the proceedings, either upon or without the application of either party, and on such terms as m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mber of the petitioner No. 1-company, as per Section 2(55) of the Companies Act, 2013. (d) Accused are liable to be punished of malicious intentions causing great harm to the petitioners. (e) Rights of the petitioners to amend pleadings were preserved. (f) It is further stated that the applicant is aggrieved by all acts referred to in Company Petition and seeks to agitate statutory relief by seeking impleadment in the Company Petition as Petitioner No. 7. 5. After hearing both the sides, the parties sought and were granted liberty to file written submissions. 6. In the written submissions the applicant argued as follows : i. Applicant is a necessar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Court for the same relief of his impleadment as a party as a petitioner No. 8 in company petition No. 144/2016, so as to avoid further proceedings and delay. The applicant has filed combined written submissions for CA No. 731/2020 filed by Mr. Vineet Khosla for impleadment as petitioner No. 7 in CP No. 144/2016 and written submissions for CA No. 553/2020 as a respondent in that application, filed by Mr. Vikram Bakshi (respondent No. 2 in company petition) Under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for referring the parties to Arbitration. 7. The written submissions of respondent No. 2 are as follows: i. The arguments of these respondents are based on the facts that the status of the applican....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; iv. The application being time barred under Section 433 of the Companies Act. 8. Knowing the background of the petition filed in the year 2007 and another petition filed in the year 2016, both filed by the petitioner, we observe as under : i. The present petition is filed in the year 2016 and today almost after four years, the application is to add one party claiming to be shareholder/director as petitioner, without any justification or reasons to show that how without adding the name of the applicant in the petition filed by the company along with its shareholders/Directors under Section 241-242 of the Companies Act for the acts of oppression and mismanagement, the prejudice will be caused if, &nbs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the members (even though they are not party to proceedings) but also it decides the rights of parties in rem. v. Present petition is filed by the company along with members/directors of petitioner No. 1-company, which generally is not the case. Thus the interest of all members will be taken care of, albeit without being joined in the proceedings. If the arguments of the applicant are accepted that he has qualified to be impleaded as a party in proceedings under Section 241-242 of the Companies Act, 2013, merely because he is a member of the company as described under Section 2(55) of the Companies Act, 2013, then every member may need or file such application, at any stage of the proceedings and the main petition may n....