Central Information Commission
Amit Gupta vs Ministry Of Corporate Affairs on 5 March, 2026
CIC/MOCAF/A/2024/654438
के ीय सूचना आयोग
Central Information Commission
बाबा गंगनाथ माग,मुिनरका
Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka
नई द ली, New Delhi - 110067
ि तीय अपील सं या / Second Appeal No. CIC/MOCAF/A/2024/654438
Amit Gupta ... अपीलकता/Appellant
VERSUS
बनाम
CPIO: Ministry of
Corporate Affairs, New Delhi ... ितवादीगण/Respondents
Relevant dates emerging from the appeal:
RTI : 13.05.2024 FA : 09.08.2024 SA : 13.12.2024
CPIO : Not on record FAO : 09.09.2024 Hearing : 27.02.2026
Date of Decision: 27.02.2026
CORAM:
Hon'ble Commissioner
P R Ramesh
ORDER
1. The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 13.05.2024 seeking information on the following points:
Please provide Scheme of Amalgamation/Arrangement for the following two transactions -
a) In 2000, Pfizer acquired Warner Lambert, which included Capsugel as a division.
b) In 2011, Pfizer sold Capsugel to Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (KKR), a private equity firm, Page 1 of 5 CIC/MOCAF/A/2024/654438
2. Having not received any response from the CPIO, the Appellant filed a First Appeal dated 09.08.2024 The FAA vide order dated 09.09.2024 observed as under:-
In view of the given circumstances the FAA is of the view that CPIO should be directed to fresh look the matter and should send a suitable further reply to the RTI Applicant in the interest of the RTI Act, 2005, keeping in view overall facts, circumstances, Rules and Guidelines as applicable to such cases and matters.
As regards to the issue of affording an opportunity hearing of the applicant, it is found that the subject matter is of such a nature, which do not need any personal hearing of parties and as such the appellant has not requested for any hearing of his FA. Therefore, the FAA has proceeded the matter further, accordingly.
Under the aforesaid circumstance, the FAA is of the considered opinion that the present appeal deserves to be considered, under the due process of RTI Act, 2005 as applicable to First Appeal matters, hence suitable order need to be issued w.r.t. CPIO's order/disposal in the present matter. Accordingly, the CPIO is directed to re-look the matter and shall send a suitable point wise reply to the RTI Applicant within 30 days from the date of disposal off the FAA matter, keeping in view overall facts, circumstances, Rules and Guidelines and official secrecy and exceptions available in the RTI Act, if any, as may be, applicable to such cases and matters including forwarding of such application to other offices if the fact and circumstances of the matter belongs to any other public office if any, by the CPIO as the case may be strictly as per the Law and Rules of RTI Act.
Accordingly, and view of the aforesaid, fact & circumstances of the matter & the detailed observations of FAA, the matter is disposed off vide today's order dated
03.09.2024.
However, the appellant is at liberty the file Second Appeal if any, if he so desire before the Hon'ble CIC, New Delhi in prescribed manner as the case may be and Page 2 of 5 CIC/MOCAF/A/2024/654438 he is requested to cooperate to furnish copy of such second appeal before the CPIO, in advance for expedition of the matter in the interest of justice.
The matter is accordingly disposed off.
3. Aggrieved and dissatisfied, the Appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal dated 13.12.2024.
Facts emerging in Course of Hearing:
Appellant: Present in person Respondent: Shri Vikram Singh, Jt. Director- participated in the hearing.
4. The Appellant inter alia submitted that the information sought has not been provided till date. He averred that he had sought scheme of amalgamation/arrangement in reference to Pfizer acquired Warner Lambert, which included Capsugel as a division in the year 2000, and Pfizer sold Capsugel to Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (KKR), in the year 2011. He averred that he had purchased shares of the aforesaid company, and the company is not responding to them despite various requests/reminders.
5. The Respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that the relevant information as available in their records has been duly provided to the Appellant. He averred regarding merger or acquisition assets liabilities can be verified from the annual returns, balance sheets which can be seen taking online/physical inspection. A written submission dated 24.02.2026 has been received from the CPIO and same has been taken on record for perusal. The relevant extract whereof is as under:
"...Kindly refer to your above referred notice dated 20.01.2026 listed for hearing on 27.02.2026 on the 2nd appeal application from Shri Amit Gupta. In this regard, the CIC has observed that courts, tribunals, and departmental procedures already provide mechanisms for obtaining records relevant to disputes. RTI, it said, cannot be used as a shortcut or substitute Page 3 of 5 CIC/MOCAF/A/2024/654438 for those processes. The information sought in RTI application is related to scheme of amalgamation/arrangement filled before the concerned Hon'ble High Court/National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) for the following two transactions:
a. In 2000, Pfizer acquired Warner Lambert, which included Capsugel as a division.
b. In 2011, Pfizer sold Capsugel to Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (KKR), a private equity firm.
2. Pursuant to Section 399 of the Companies Act, 2013, enables any person to inspect, electronically or otherwise, documents filed with the Registrar of Companies. (ROC) upon paying prescribed fees. It allows obtaining certified copies of companies, and restricts the production of documents in court without proper authority.
3. The applicant may be informed to obtain the documents from the concerned jurisdictional High Court/NCLT/ROC...."
Decision:
6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both parties and perusal of records, observed that the Appellant had purchased shares in a company and has sought information regarding the scheme of amalgamation/arrangement in reference to the concerned company. Upon perusal of records and examining the facts of the case at hand, it is noted that the Appellant's queries had been appropriately answered by the custodian of information. Furthermore, written submission filed by the Respondent is comprehensive and self-explanatory. Thus, information as permissible under the provisions of the RTI Act has been duly supplied to the Appellant. It is noted that information regarding information regarding merger or acquisition, assets and liabilities transferred can be verified from the annual returns, balance sheet etc can be seen by taking online/physical inspection of the records filed by Page 4 of 5 CIC/MOCAF/A/2024/654438 the company. Commission observes that as per Section 399 of Companies Act r. w. Rule 12 and 13, the Appellant is always at liberty to inspect the relevant records and obtain information and documents by payment of prescribed fee and there is no denial on part of CPIO. In the given circumstances, no further intervention of the Commission is required in the instant matter as the Appellant has an efficacious alternative remedy to obtain the information. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.
Sd/-
(P R Ramesh) (पी. आर. रमेश) Information Commissioner (सूचना आयु ) Authenticated true copy Vivek Agarwal (िववेक अ वाल) Dy. Registrar (उप पंजीयक) 011-26107048 Addresses of the parties:
1 The CPIO Joint Director & CPIO, O/o.
the Director General-(CA), Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Kota House Annexe, 1--Shahjahan Road, New Delhi-110011.
2 Amit Gupta Page 5 of 5 Recomendation(s) to PA under section 25(5) of the RTI Act, 2005:-
Nil Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)