BENNETT COLEMAN AND CO. LTD. Vs. SANJAY SINHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition has been filed challenging the order dtd. 16/1/2026 passed by the trial Court, whereby the Trial Court has allowed application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC filed by the plaintiff, thereby the plaintiff has plaintiff's application to implead Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd. (BCCL for short) has been allowed.

(2.) The aforesaid order has been put to challenge on the ground that the suit has been filed by the petitioner, who claims to be an ex-employee of the company for damages arising out of his stated illegal termination of services on 28/1/2021. Therefore, it is contended that the limitation would have been up to 28/9/2024 and the suit having been filed on 28/9/2024 itself, which was the last date of limitation, therefore, the application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC seeking to implead the present petitioner has been allowed in respect of time barred relief.

(3.) Elaborating the aforesaid assertion, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that once the suit was not initially filed against the employer company, but against various Directors and Officers of the Company, then the employer company itself was not party to the litigation and the application for impleadment under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC having been filed after expiry of period of limitation of 3 years, which got expired on 28/9/2024. Therefore, the application for impleadment could not have been allowed, because the claim as against the petitioner company became barred by limitation. It is further argued that the trial Court has erroneously held in the impugned order that since the Vice Chairman and Managing Director of the Company were already on record in the suit, therefore, there would be no question of suit against the company becoming barred by limitation, because since the Managing Director of the Company was already on record, therefore, the impleadment of the company would not amount to impleadment of a new party. It is argued that the aforesaid finding of the trial Court is contrary to Companies Act and the concept of incorporation.