HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD O.S.A.No.24 of 2011 Date: 21-03-2011 Between: Barah Moula Educational Society ……. Appellant and M/s. Sirsilk Ltd …….. Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P. DURGA PRASAD O.S.A.No.24 of 2011 ORDER: (Per BPR,J) Heard Sri B. Venkat Rama Rao learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri M. Anil Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Official Liquidator. At their request, the main appeal itself is taken up for disposal. In this Appeal, which is filed under Section 483 of the Companies Act, the appellant, who is a third party and who is sought to be impleaded, seeks to assail the order of the learned single Judge, dated 27-09-2010 in C.A.No.470 of 2010 in C.A.No.1391 of 2004 in C.A.No.909 of 2002 in Company Petition No.57 of 1999, only to the extent of adding a rider, while allowing the said application, that the appellant can contest the case on all the grounds, but not on the ground of limitation. We have heard both the counsel on merits at length and perused the material on record. Admittedly the present application in C.A.No.470 of 2010 is filed under Order 1 Rule 10 of C.P.C. at the instance of the respondent herein to implead the appellant herein by specifically mentioning that the appellant runs the institution whose presence is necessary in the process of liquidation. The said application has been contested by the appellant on various grounds. The learned single Judge, after considering the entire material, held that the bar of limitation equally applies against the appellant under Section 21 of the Limitation Act and therefore, allowed the application with liberty to the appellant to contest the proceedings, but excluded him from contesting on the ground of limitation. It is now well established that as per the scope of Order 1 Rule 10 of C.P.C., what all the Court has to see is whether the proposed party has got semblance of right or interest and if that be so, he should be allowed to come on record, but should not go into the merits of any such right or interest or say anything. All these aspects necessarily have to be gone into after the person is impleaded and he is given opportunity. In view of the same, without expressing any opinion on all other aspects, we hereby set aside the order of the learned single Judge, dated 27-09-2010 in C.A.No.470 of 2010 only to the extent of excluding the appellant from contesting the proceedings on the ground of limitation. We further make it clear that both the parties are entitled to agitate their claims, rights and objections and substantiate the same by adducing appropriate evidence and the same shall be considered on all aspects including the ground of limitation uninfluenced by any of the findings or observations given in these proceedings. Subject to the above, the Appeal is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________ B. PRAKASH RAO, J _________________ P. DURGA PRASAD, J Date: 21-03-2011 YCR