NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL COURT ROOM NO. 1 MUMBAI BENCH Item No. 17 COMP.APPL/ 68(MB)2026 IN CP/28(MB)2022 CORAM:

SH. PRABHAT KUMAR SH. SUSHIL MAHADEORAO KOCHEY HON’BLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL) HON’BLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING ON 20.03.2026 NAME OF THE PARTIES: MRS. SARITA NANDKUMAR KALE VS MR.

SAMEER NANDKUMAR KALE Section 241(1) Sec. 242(4) of the Companies Act, 2013

ORDER

COMP.APPL/ 68(MB)2026

1. Adv. Kunal Kanungo a/w Adv. Abhijit Mukherjee for the Applicant are present.

Adv. Ashish Pyasi a/w Adv. Raj J. Kapadia, Adv. Yashwin Daga for the Respondent are present.

2. This is an Application filed by the Applicant, Mrs. Sarita Nandkumar Kale under Rule 11 r/w. 32 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 20r6 and the provision of Section 241 and 242 r/w. 62, 447 and 448 of the Companies Act, 2013.

The Applicant seeks following relief :

a. This Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to recall/set aside the Order dated

19th December, 2025 and 11^th February, 2026 passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal in CP No. 28 (MB) 2022.

b. Grant leave to the Respondents to file their Surrejoinder to the fresh Rejoinder dated 21.11.2025 filed by the Petitioner, and be pleased to take the same on record which is annexed and marked as Exhibit C of the Company Petitioner.

c. Grant such reasonable time as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit for filing the Sur-rejoinder, in the interest of justice;

3. The Applicant is Original Respondent No. 1 and member of Board of Director of Kale Entertainment & Resort Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the said Company"). The Applicant is holding 21.54% of share capital in said Company. The Petitioner is stated to be once member of Board of Director of the said Company but he was removed from Directorship vide Annual General Meeting on 30^th November, 2021. The Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 is member of Board of Directors, holding 16.39%, 5.74% and 5.74% each in said Company. The Respondent No. 5 is a Company Secretary of the said Company.

4. The present Company Application is filed by the Applicant/Original Respondent No. 1 seeking recall/set aside of the orders dated 19^th December, 2025 and 11^th February, 2026 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal in CP No. 28 (MB) 2022, whereby this Tribunal recorded that pleadings were complete and the matter was ripe for hearing, without granting the Respondents an opportunity to file their Sur-rejoinder to the Rejoinder filed by the Petitioner.

5. It is stated by the applicant that the chronology of events demonstrates that the Petitioner took considerable time in filing the Rejoinder after the Respondents had filed their Reply on 26.09.2023. The first Rejoinder was served only on 24.07.2025 and the same was incomplete and unpaginated. The Petitioner repeatedly sought time to rectify the defects and even withdrew the earlier Rejoinder on 21.11.2025 to file a fresh and complete Rejoinder incorporating additional arguments. The complete Rejoinder was ultimately served upon the Respondents only on 21.11.2025. Thus, the effective right of the Respondents to file Surrejoinder arose only after service of the complete Rejoinder on 21.11.2025. It is contended that the Respondents were to seek time for filing the Sur-rejoinder on 19.12.2025, however, due to connectivity issues, the submissions of the Respondents’ counsel could not be heard, resulting in the order recording that pleadings were complete.

6. The Respondents submit that grave prejudice would be caused if they are denied the opportunity to file Surrejoinder to deal with the additional pleadings and averments introduced in the fresh Rejoinder dated 21.11.2025. Allowing the Sur- rejoinder would not cause any prejudice to the Petitioner, whereas denial of such opportunity would amount to violation of principles of natural justice.

7. In view of aforesaid submissions and interest of justice, we allow the applicant to file sur-rejoinder within 15 days from the date of communication of this order. A copy of said sur-rejoinder be served