- (1.) The petitioner filed C.A. No. 148 of 2016 seeking amendment of main company petition to add paragraphs in relation to the allegations mentioned below : "• To add paragraph-c mentioned in the application in page 8 of the main company petition as to "As of now..." to say that the petitioner was not present in the meeting held on February 16, 2015 wherein he was shown as removed as a director. • To add that the respondents have not prepared and got the audited the final accounts for the financial years 2014-15 and 2015-16 and not filed annual returns for the said years. • To add that the petitioner has found a huge sum of Rs. 137 crores is due and payable by the debtors of the company to the company. • To add respondent No. 2 started a new company Gujarat Lumber P. Ltd., carrying on the same business as that of the company and diverting the business of the company to the said company causing huge loss to the company and further saying respondent No. 2 is making high seas sales from the company to respondent No. 1 and the sum of about Rs. 5 crores is payable by the said company to respondent No. 1 on account of dubious transactions between the two companies. • To add respondents Nos. 2 and 4 have committed fraud in managing the affairs of the company therefore, they are liable to be punished under section 447 of this Act. • To add relief "m" to direct the respondents to recover dues of the company from its debtors with a direction to such debtor to pay the amounts of such debts to the banks directing to the loans taken for funding such debtors. • To add relief "n" to pay the amounts outstanding and payable to the bank only after payment of the amount recovered from the debtors. • To add paragraph "o" for appointment of a retired judge of a High Court to determine the amount loss caused to the company by the mismanagement of the affairs of the company by respondents Nos. 2 and 4. • To add paragraph "p" to direct respondent No. 2 to produce the books of account of Gujarat Lumber P. Ltd., since its inception. • To add paragraph "q" to convene the annual general meetings for the years 2015 and 2016 and to place the audited final accounts of the company in the said annual general meetings. • To delete prayer clause c in final reliefs which is in relation to a direction seeking against respondent No. 2 to purchase the shares of the petitioner at the fair value as may be determined by this Bench by engaging a firm of chartered accountant or to direct respondent No. 2 to sell his shares to the petitioner at fair value as determined by this Bench and also to compensate respondent No. 1 for the loss sustained by respondent No. 1 due to inefficient management by respondent No. 2. • To add relief to declare that the petitioner has not resigned as a director of the company and continues as a director without any break and direct the reinstatement of the petitioner as director of the company. • To add relief to direct respondents Nos. 2 and 4 to bring to the account of the company the amounts received by them from the debtors of the company which are misappropriated by them and not brought to the company. • To add relief to direct respondents Nos. 2 and 3 to compensate for the losses caused to the company. • To add a relief for appointment of an administrator to look after the affairs of the company to the exclusion of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 pending the hearing and final disposal of this company petition. The petitioner counsel submits that the above amendments are necessary for the adjudication of the real controversy involved in the main petition and also submits that these amendments will not cause any prejudice to the respondents herein.
(2.) On perusal of this application, it is evident that this petitioner asking amendments to improve the case of the petitioner, to insert new material facts giving new cause of action to the petitioner to enlarge his case on some other grounds as well and also to delete the reliefs which he now feels inconvenient to the petitioner.
(3.) The respondents reply to this application is that the petitioners now alleging that the respondents indulged in fraudulent activities, which were not there in the original company petition and averments in the application are vague and baseless.;