SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 2761

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Anupam Mittal – Appellant
Versus
People Interactive (India) Private Limited – Respondent
COMP.APPL - 392/2023



Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Rahul Dwarkadas

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL COURT-V, MUMBAI BENCH CP/92(MB)2021 CORAM:

MS. REETA KOHLI, MS. MADHU SINHA, MEMBER (J) MEMBER (T)

ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING OF MUMBAI BENCH OF THE

14.09.2023.

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL ON NAME OF THE PARTIES: Anupam Mittal V/s People Interactive (India) Private Limited Sec. 241(1), 242(4) of the Companies Act 2013

ORDER

Heard the Sr. Counsel for the parties. Appropriate orders to be passed. Reserved.

Sd/- Sd/-

MADHU SINHA REETA KOHLI Member(Technical) Member(Judicial)

/Z/

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH, COURT V CA/392/2023 IN CP/92(MB)2021 In the matter of:

Section 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013 (“the Act”) and the rules framed thereunder;

AND People Interactive (India) Private Limited (CIN: U72900MH2000PTC124485), a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 ANUPAM MITTAL An Indian inhabitant residing at 182, Mehr Naz Co- op. Housing Society, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai – 400

005.

…Applicant/Org. Petitioner IN THE MATTER OF, ANUPAM MITTAL, An Indian inhabitant residing at 182, Mehr Naz Co- op. Housing Society, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai – 400

005.

…… Petitioner Vs.

1. PEOPLE INTERACTIVE (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED A company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and having its registered office at 2-B(2) (ii) Ground Floor, Film Centre Building, Near A. C. Market, 68 Tardeo Road, Mumbai-400034

2. WESTBRIDGE VENTURES II INVESTMENT HOLDINGS A company organized under the laws of Mauritius and having its registered office at IFS Court, Bank Street, Twenty Eight, Cybercity, Ebene-72201, Mauritius.

3. MS. SHOBITHA ANNIE MANI Director of People Interactive (India) Private Limited, # G-6, Aishwarya Apartments, No. 38, Rest House Road Near Brigade Road, Shantala Nagar Ward, Bangalore-560 001, Karnataka, India.

4. MR. ANAND MITTAL Director of People Interactive (India) Private Limited, An Indian inhabitant residing at 15, Satnam Apartment, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 005.

5. MR. NAVIN MITTAL An Indian inhabitant residing at 15, Satnam Apartment, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-400 005.

…… Respondent Order dated 15.09.2023 Coram:

Hon’ble Reeta Kohli, Member (Judicial)

Hon’ble Madhu Sinha, Member (Technical)

Appearance:

For the Petitioner: Sr. Counsel Mr. Ravi Kadam, Sr. Counsel Mr.

Sharan Jagtiani, Counsel Mr. Kunal Dwarkadas, Adv. Rahul Dwarkadas, Adv. Areez Gazdar, Adv. Nutash Kotwal, Adv.

Shireen Mistri For the Respondent No. 2: Senior Counsel Janak Dwarkadas a/w Senior Counsel Nikhil Sakhardande, Mr. Rajendra Barot, Ms. Anusha Jacob, Ms. Mrudula Dixit, Ms. Richa Borthakur For the Respondent No. 4: Ms. Rishika Harish, Ms. Shivani Prasad

ORDER

Per: Reeta Kohli, Member (Judicial)

1. The prayer in the present application is for grant of temporary injunction restraining the Respondents to invoke arbitration at Singapore under the Rules of International Court of Arbitration during the pendency of the present petition under Section 241-242 of the Companies Act 2013 pending before this Tribunal. The urgency in this application is being pressed on the ground that the arbitration proceedings are scheduled in Singapore from 18.09.2023 to 22.09.2023. It is pertinent to state that vide an interim order dated 11.09.2023 by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, the Applicant/Petitioner has been granted an Anti-enforcement action order restraining the Respondents/Defendants from enforcing an Anti-enforcement suit granted by the High Court of Singapore. The High Court of Singapore had restrained the Applicant/Petitioner from proceeding with the present company petition against the Respondents before the National Company Law Tribunal Mumbai raising disputes pertaining to Oppression and Mismanagement. Vide the present interim application Applicant/Petitioner is seeking an injunction restraining the Respondents from invoking arbitration against the Petitioner.

2. We have heard the Ld. Senior Counsels of the parties and with their able assistance have been able to cull out the issues as under:

a. The case of the A

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top