9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1952X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his appeal has been preferred by the appellant against order dated 20th December, 2016 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench (hereinafter referred as the "Tribunal" for short) in Company Application No. 552/2013 in Company Petition No. 41 of 2013 whereby and whereunder the amendment petition filed by the appellant has been partly allowed allowing the appellant to implead Mr. Jatin Jamandas Mavani, nominee director of the IOTL as 10th Respondent to the Company Petition. 2. The appeal was heard on 16th February, 2017, when this Court passed the following order: - "The Tribunal vide impugned order dated 20.12.2016 observed that the appellant/petitioner had the knowledge about the Board Meeting held on 31st Decembe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceedings of the Board Meeting held on 31.12.2012 and EGM dated 31.12.2012 should be placed on record, and the Tribunal was required to allow the appeal to the extent of subsequent development if taken place after filing of the Company Petition, Ld. Counsel for the parties requested to pass an appropriate order after hearing the parties. Let notice be issued on the Respondents No. 1 and 3 to 9 by speed post. Requisites with process fee, notified, be filed by tomorrow. Notice be also issued through email, if provided. Dasti service is permitted. Post this matter on 6th March, 2017. The appeal may be disposed of on the next day." 3. Heard Mr. Shri Sumesh Dhawan, Learned Advocate for appellant and Mr. Krishnan Venugopal, Learned S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Companies Act, 2013 by filing a separate petition. 9. The impugned order dated 20.12.2016 stands modified and substituted to the extent above, with liberty to appellant to file additional affidavit in consonance with the observations made above, within 15 days. 10. The Tribunal in its turn will take into account the additional facts, if it is in consonance with the observations made in the preceding paragraphs, otherwise will ignore the other facts by deleting such paragraphs from the additional affidavit. 11. We may make it clear, that we have not allowed the appellant to raise any plea with regard to Mr. Ramachandran's presence in the Board's Meeting/EGM Meeting on 31.12.2016, except to the extent it has already been pleaded. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
