2024 (5) TMI 1450

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Yogesh Khanna ] Member ( Judicial ) And [ Ajai Das Mehrotra ] Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : Mr. Dhiren R Dave , Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Vaibhavi Parikh , Ms. Anushree Kapadia , Mr. M. T. Reddy , Advocates ORDER ( Hybrid Mode ) This appeal is filed against an impugned order dated 22.02.2024 whereby an application of recall of an order dated 11.01.2024 was dismis....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ut also failed on multiple fronts. 4. It is said since the Respondent No. 7 had filed the valuation report; thus was made a party to the Company Petition before the Ld. NCLT. However vide order dated 11.01.2024, the Ld. NCLT passed the following order : CP/29(AHM)2022 It is seen that Respondent No. 7 who is happened to be valuer has given valuation report, has been added one o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ding unnecessarily that FD will be order to be released in favour of the Respondent No. 7 " . 5. Vide this order the Ld. NCLT had prima facie found the Respondent No. 7 was unnecessarily made a party to the petition, hence directed the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- with it in the shape of FDR and at the time of final adjudication if it was to be found that Respondent No.7 wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s of the Company Petition were all denied. It was alleged in the reply the petitioner had got fabricated such valuation report. 7. Except the above there is no other pleading qua role of the Respondent No. 7 except he only had prepared a valuation report. Further admittedly no relief was claimed against Respondent No. 7 as he was a Proforma Respondent. Hence, we are of the opinion the Ld. NCLT ....