Kishore Kakumal Keswani vs Manohar Kakumal Keswani & Ors. & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) No. 284 of 2026
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appeal against rejection of an amendment application is closed without a merits decision because the main petition has already been heard and reserved for judgment, so any amended pleadings could not be incorporated and considered on merits at that stage; the question of the amendment's propriety is left open to be raised on appeal from the final judgment, in light of Section 105 of the CPC.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Kishore Kakumal Keswani ...Appellant Versus Manohar Kakumal Keswani & Ors. ...Respondents Present: For Appellant : Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar, Sr. Advocate with Adv. C. Priyadarshi, Advocates.
For Respondents : Mr. Rishav Banerjee, Mr. Ativ Patel, Ms. Priyanka Vora and Ms. Anshika Prakash, Advocates for R-1 & R-2.
Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Cavetor.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
31.08.2026: The Appellant has come before us, being aggrieved by the
impugned Order dated 24.06.2026 that was passed in Company Petition No.
1300 of 2020. The learned Tribunal, while considering Company Application
No. 28 of 2026 preferred by the Appellant, seeking to bring about certain
amendments in the pleadings, had rejected the proposed amendment to be
permitted to be carried.
2. In this Company Appeal, during its pendency, the main CP has
already concluded and the judgment in the same has been reserved.
3. Owing to the changed circumstances, because of the fact that the
arguments in the Company Petition have already been concluded and the
judgment has been reserved, as a matter of fact, no concrete decision is desirable in this Company Appeal, on the merits of the matter in relation to
issue of amendment, because in either of the circumstances, the amended
pleadings cannot be permitted to be incorporated and be considered on
merits in a matter in which the judgment has already been reserved.
4. In that eventuality, while taking this fact on record, this Company
Appeal is closed, leaving it open for the Appellant that, in either of the
circumstances, when the final judgment is rendered, it will be open for the
parties, and particularly for the Appellant, it would be open for the Appellant
to raise the question at an appellate stage, if at all so required, in the light of
the provisions contained under Section 105 of the CPC.
5. Company Appeal would stand closed accordingly.
[Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)
[Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical) rashmi/rr
2 of 2
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free