LAWS(DLH)-2006-3-55

ANIL NANDA Vs. ESCORTS LIMITED

Decided On March 06, 2006
ANIL NANDA Appellant
V/S
ESCORTS LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of plaintiffs' application under Order 6 Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the plaint.

(2.) The plaintiffs have filed the suit for decree for mandatory injunction directing restoration of the assets, properties and facilities of second defendant and its ownership, management and control and its character and structure to its original status of a public charitable institution dedicated wholly and exclusively to public service and declaration and permanent injunction seeking declaration that the amalgamation of EHIRC-Delhi with EHIRC- Chandigarh is non-est and bad in law and also that conversion of EHIRC- Chandigarh into a Limited company is also void and contrary to law. Consequently, the plaintiffs have prayed for permanent injunction against defendant No.1 from transferring, alienating or otherwise creating any third party rights or interest with respect to the shares held by defendant No.1 in defendant No.2.

(3.) The plaintiffs have contended that subsequent to the filing of the written statement in order to pursue the suit the plaintiffs carried out an inspection of the records of the Registrar of Societies, Chandigarh, Delhi and Registrar of Companies, Jhallandhur and during this exercise some facts have been discovered which have direct bearing on the question pending adjudication in the suit. It was contended that from the facts revealed during the inspection it appears that the defendants have falsified and back dated the resolutions passed by Delhi Society on 15th January, 2000/26th February, 2000 in order to give credence to the story of amalgamation, however, the fact as transpired is that there was no amalgamation of EHIRC-Delhi with EHIRC-Chandigarh and consequently the plaintiffs want to amend the plaint and seek a declaration also to the effect that there was no amalgamation of EHIRC-Delhi with EHIRC- Chandigarh. The plaintiffs contend that the proposed amendments are necessary for determination of real controversies between the parties and shall be necessary for full and proper adjudication of disputes.