AA’s Order Allowing Amended Petition on Oppression & Mismanagement Without Giving Chance to Be Heard Was to Be Overturned | NCLAT
- Blog|News|Company Law|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 15 November, 2024
Case Details: Kochar Sungup Acrylic Ltd. v. Sunny Kochar - [2024] 168 taxmann.com 171 (NCLAT-New Delhi)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
-
- Justice Yogesh Khanna, Judicial Member & Ajai Das Mehrotra, Technical Member
Facts of the Case
In the instant case, the respondent filed the Company Petition under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act 2013, alleging oppression and mismanagement in the affairs of the appellant company.
The Respondent filed an application seeking to place on record an amended petition directly. The NCLT vide the impugned order allowed the said application. The appellant vide instant appeal alleged that the impugned order was passed contrary to principles of law relating to the amendment of pleadings contained in Order VI Rule 17 of CPC applicable to proceedings before the NCLT.
According to the appellant, the amended petition was filed by completely redrafting the original petition with additional grounds, and thus, it was a fresh petition in the guise of an amendment. Further, no opportunity was granted to the appellant to respond to the amended petition.
It was noted that amendments were substantial in nature. Admittedly, new reliefs had been added in the amended petition as also a new party being impleaded. For such substantial amendments, an application ought to have been moved with such proposed amendments and with liberty to appellants to rebut such proposed amendments and only thereafter, amended petition ought to have been brought on record.
NCLAT Held
The NCLAT held that since the impugned order did not adhere to principles of natural justice, it did not give an opportunity of being heard to the appellant. Thus, the impugned order was to be set aside. One more opportunity be given to the respondent to move an application for amendment, inclusive of proposed amendments with liberty to the appellant to respond to such application and thereafter the NCLT to decide it as per law. Thus, the instant appeal was to be allowed.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Judgement and order dated 07.06.2024 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench II in CP/24(24(CH)2024 [2024] 167 taxmann.com 616 (Chad.) (Para 13) reversed
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.
Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied