Authority: National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench, Court - 1, Ahmedabad

Order Date: 10/07/2026

Case Overview

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Ahmedabad heard two interconnected applications filed in Company Petition No.72(AHM)2025. The first application (IA/19(AHM)2026) was filed by Harshvardhan Lunia (Founder and Shareholder of Lendingkart Technologies Pvt Ltd) along with Raichand Lunia and Anand Lunia (other shareholders) seeking impleadment of Innoven Capital India Fund (through its investment manager Innoven Triple Blue Capital Advisors LLP) as Respondent No.14 and Vistra Capital ITCL (India) Limited (debenture trustee of Innoven Capital India Fund) as Respondent No.15. The applicants contended that these entities were directly connected with the issuance of Non-Convertible Debentures (NCDs) that formed part of the allegations of oppression and mismanagement in the main company petition, and their inclusion was necessary for complete adjudication.

The second application (IA/21(AHM)2026) was filed by Innoven Capital India Private Limited (Respondent No.11) seeking deletion of its name from the array of parties in the main company petition, arguing it was impleaded due to mistaken identity as the impugned NCD transaction pertained to Innoven Capital India Fund, not the applicant.

The Tribunal heard arguments from Senior Advocates Saurabh Soparkar (for applicants), Navin Pahwa (for Respondent No.2), and other counsel representing various parties. Respondent Nos.1, 2, 6, 14 and 15 opposed the impleadment application, arguing that the proposed respondents were neither necessary nor proper parties to proceedings under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, and that the main petition contained no pleadings disclosing cause of action against them.

Final Outcome

The NCLT dismissed IA/19(AHM)2026, rejecting the prayer to implead Innoven Capital India Fund and Vistra ITCL (India) Limited as respondents. The Tribunal held that while the petitioners had referred to the NCD transaction as part of alleged oppression circumstances, there were no specific pleadings attributing any act of oppression, mismanagement, fraud, breach of duty or illegality to either proposed respondent. The court noted that no substantive relief had been sought against these entities in the original petition, and their impleadment would unnecessarily widen the scope of proceedings beyond the framework of the original petition.

The Tribunal allowed IA/21(AHM)2026, ordering the deletion of Innoven Capital India Private Limited (Respondent No.11) from the array of parties. The court found that the applicant had been erroneously impleaded as the impugned NCD transaction admittedly pertained to Innoven Capital India Fund, not the applicant. The Tribunal held that mere common business group, common premises, or shared directorships did not constitute legal basis for retaining a party against whom no sustainable cause of action was disclosed.

The petitioners were directed to carry out necessary amendments in the cause title of the main petition within seven days. No costs were awarded.

Topics: NCLT Procedure, Oppression & Mismanagement, Party Impleadment