Bikki Raveendra Babu, Member - (1.) These two petitions are filed under Section 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013 alleging oppression and mismanagement in conducting the affairs of Nano Therapeutics Private Limited, which is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. Sole petitioner in CP 16 of 2016 is second respondent in CP 15 of 2016. Second respondent in CP 6 of 2016 is sole petitioner in CP 15 of 2016. In both the petitions, the first respondent is Nano Therapeutics Private Limited. Respondents 5 and 8 in CP 15 of 2016 are son and daughter of respondent 2. Respondent 2 in CP 15 of 2016 is elder brother of petitioner in CP 15 of 2016.
(2.) The parties in this order are referred to as arrayed in CP 15 of 2016 for the sake of convenience and better understanding. Case of the petitioner as can be seen from the averments made in CP 15 of 2016 and reply filed in CP 6 of 2016 in brief is as follows:-
(3.) Respondent 2 was an employee in Sahajanand Medical Technologies, Surat till he was retrenched in the year 2005. During his employment, respondent 2 approached the petitioner with an idea to start the business of manufacturing and selling of stent under the partnership firm. Respondent 2 proposed to start partnership firm in the name of his wife (respondent 8) since respondent 2 being in employment of the said firm could not be partner in the other firm. Accordingly, partnership firm was established viz. Biosync Scientific (Biosync) on 21.07.2003 with capital and profit ratio as under:- ;