- (1.) This Company Appeal arises out of an order passed by the Company Law Board, rejecting an application filed by the appellant seeking leave to file a rejoinder to the counter filed by the fifth respondent before the Company Law Board.
(2.) Heard Mr.P.J.Rishikesh, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr.P.H.Arvind Pandian, learned Senior Counsel for the fourth respondent and Mr.R.Shankar Narayanan, learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent. Notice to respondents 1 to 3 is dispensed with for the following reasons:- (i) The second respondent already remained ex parte even before the Company Law Board, after having sold his shares to the fourth respondent; and (ii) Respondents 1 and 3 have no conflict of interest with the appellant, and they are represented by the same counsel.
(3.) Without getting into any factual details, the short question of law that arises for consideration in this appeal is as to whether one of the respondents in a petition before the Company Law Board under Sections 397 and 398 is entitled to file a reply to the counter filed by a co-respondent or not.;