Satya Narain Sharma-HUF vs Ashwani Sarees Pvt. Ltd.

S.N. Aggarwal, J.—This order will dispose of two miscellaneous applications being IA No. 1700/2009 under Order 1 Rule 10 (2) CPC and IA No. 2165/2009 u/s 151 CPC filed by Ms. Rina Chawla and Ms. Asha Chawla for their impleadment in the suit and for opportunity to them to file their written statements.

I have heard Mr. Girish Aggarwal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants on these applications.

Admittedly, the applicants seeking their impleadment in the suit are the other two Directors of the defendant company. The written statement on behalf of the defendant company was filed by its Managing Director-cum-Chairman Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chawla. Mr. Aggarwal, appearing on behalf of the applicants had argued that Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chawla through whom the written statement was filed on behalf of the defendant is in collusion with the plaintiff and also he is in collusion with Mr. M.V. Rao, GM, Audit who was a signatory to the lease agreement. The argument of Mr. Aggarwal was that Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chawla has colluded with the plaintiff to cause wrongful loss to the defendant company and according to him, the said Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chawla has admitted the pleadings of the plaintiff for reasons best know to him. The contention of Mr. Aggarwal was that the written statement filed by Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chawla on behalf of the defendant company was without any authority from the applicants and therefore, an opportunity is sought on their behalf for filing of their written statements in the suit.

On giving my anxious consideration to the above arguments advanced on behalf of the applicants, I am of the view that the applicants are neither necessary nor proper parties in the suit. As per provisions contained in Order 29 Rule 1 CPC, the pleadings in a suit by or against a corporation may be signed and verified on behalf of the corporation either by its Secretary or by any Director or other Principal officer who is able to depose to the facts of the case. It may be noted that the defendant along with its written statement filed through Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chawla has filed the extract of the Resolution passed in the meeting of Board of Directors of the defendant company held on 12.01.2009 authorising its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chawla to sign and execute all documents relating to the present suit. Thus, it cannot be said that the written statement filed on behalf of the defendant company through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director was without authority of the applicants being the other two Directors of the said company.

It was next argued by Mr. Aggarwal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants that Mr. M.V. Rao, GM, Audit of the defendant company who is signatory to the lease agreement was not authorised to enter into the lease agreement on behalf of the defendant company and therefore according to him, reliance cannot be placed on the lease agreement which is made the basis of its claim by the plaintiff. I do not find any substance in this argument because the defendant did not take this objection in its reply dated 05.06.2008 when they had an opportunity to raise the objection regarding authority of Mr. M.V. Rao to enter into the lease agreement. The plea that Mr. M.V. Rao was not competent to sign the lease agreement on behalf of the defendant company thus appears to be sham and afterthought.

Having regard to the facts of the case, I do not find any merit in either of the two applications filed on behalf of the applicants and the same are, therefore, dismissed.