Superhard Research Centre ... vs Gautambhai Bhagvanbhai Sonani & Ors

IN THE MATTER OF: Superhard Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Appellant (s)

Versus

Gautambhai Bhagvanbhai Sonani & Ors. ...Respondent (s)

Present: For Appellant (s) : Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Sr. Adv., Mr. Anant Merathia, Mr. Saurabh Agrawal, Ms. Komal Mundhra, Mr. Ashutosh Singh Rana, Ms. Laxita Upadhyay, Mr. Surraj K.M., Advocates. For Respondent (s) : Mr. Kamal Kant Jha, Aishwarya Deep Singh, Ms. Aakriti, Adv.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

13.05.2026: This appeal is against an impugned order dated

02.04.2026 passed by the Ld. National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad

bench in Company Petition No. 34 of 2023. The appellant is aggrieved with

the fact (a) the Ld. NCLT has directed to provide all the documents

necessary, including the list of shareholders of the appellant company as on

31.03.2024 for the purpose of convening of the EoGM and the list of board of

Directors as on that date for the purpose of convening the meeting of the

board; (b) the appointment of Sh. Madan Bhalchandra Gosavi as an

Independent Director till the pendency of the main petition C.P. No. 34 of

2023 and (c) the Independent Director is to file a confidential report on the

state of affairs of the company.

-2-

2. Considering the fact there was no application moved by either party for

appointment of an Independent Director or requiring him to file a

confidential report as to the state of affairs of company, including allegations

made by the parties inter se, we are of the considered view that so far as the

direction qua filing of the confidential report is concerned, it needs to be set

aside, as even cogent reasons are not mentioned in the impugned order.

However, Sh. Madan Bhalchandra Gosavi may act as an Observer in the

board meetings, if at all it takes place prior to the disposal of the company

petition. In case of the board meeting or EoGM, if any, two Directors from

both the groups shall be present and the meeting shall be chaired by the

Observer, without voting right, though the appellant says they are not

inclined to conduct the EoGM.

3. We further request the Ld. NCLT, the company petition and also the

applications may be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, preferably

within two months as was our request in C.A (AT) No. 311 of 2025 passed on

08.01.2026.

4. With these observations, the appeal stands disposed of. Pending I.A. Nos. 3280 & 3281 of 2026 are also disposed of.

[Justice Yogesh Khanna] Member (Judicial)

[Mr. Ajai Das Mehrotra] Member (Technical) SA/rr

Company Appeal (AT) No. 169 of 2026