Bengaluru Bench of NCLT Permits M/s Manyata Reality as Co-Petitioner for Comprehensive Adjudication in Alleged Fraud Case
In a significant move, the Bengaluru Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has allowed the impleadment of M/s Manyata Reality as Petitioner No. 2 in an ongoing company petition filed by Manyata Infrastructure Developments Pvt. Ltd. against Buoyant Technology Constellation Pvt. Ltd. The tribunal's decision, dated June 17, 2026, is aimed at ensuring comprehensive adjudication of allegations involving fraudulent diversion of funds and misuse of land.
The case, rooted in a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated December 23, 2009, involves serious allegations against Buoyant Technology, pertaining to fraudulent activities and unlawful conduct. Manyata Infrastructure Developments Pvt. Ltd., the original petitioner, sought an investigation under Section 213(b) of the Companies Act, 2013, highlighting the necessity of involving all affected entities to provide a complete representation and avoid multiple proceedings.
The tribunal, comprising Mr. Sunil Kumar Aggarwal, Judicial Member, and Mr. Radhakrishna Sreepada, Technical Member, recognized the direct and substantial interest of M/s Manyata Reality in the proceedings. The tribunal emphasized that the presence of all parties affected by the transactions and allegations is crucial for a fair and effective adjudication of the issues involved.
Respondent No. 2 had opposed the application, arguing that it was an afterthought to address a defect in locus standi and that the petition was not maintainable without M/s Manyata Reality. However, the tribunal disagreed, stating that the application was in line with procedural provisions aimed at ensuring completeness of representation, rather than curing substantive defects.
The tribunal further noted that the proceedings are not merely an ordinary civil dispute but involve serious allegations of fraud and unlawful conduct, necessitating a thorough examination of all related parties and transactions. The decision to allow the impleadment was also supported by the tribunal's observation that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents, as they would continue to have the opportunity to contest the petition.
M/s Manyata Reality's presence in the proceedings is deemed necessary to assist the tribunal in arriving at a fair conclusion regarding the allegations and to prevent the multiplicity of proceedings concerning the same subject matter. The tribunal has directed that a copy of the order be forwarded to the newly impleaded petitioner to enable coordination with the existing petitioner for further pursuance of the case.
This development is expected to pave the way for a more comprehensive investigation into the alleged fraudulent activities and ensure that justice is delivered effectively in accordance with the law.
Bottom line:-
Impleadment of an entity as a co-petitioner can be allowed if its presence is deemed necessary for effective and complete adjudication of the controversy, particularly in cases involving investigation into allegations of fraud and unlawful conduct under Section 213(b) of the Companies Act, 2013.
Statutory provision(s): Companies Act, 2013 Section 213(b), Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order I Rule 10(2), National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 Rule 11
