Ansal Housing Limited vs M/S. Samyak Projects Pvt. Ltd
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 542 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal may recall its own judgment only on the limited grounds laid down by the five-member Bench in Union Bank of India v. Dinkar T. Venkatasubramanian; an application that in substance seeks review of a judgment, which the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to undertake, cannot be entertained as a recall application.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Ansal Housing Ltd. ....Appellant
Vs.
Samyak Projects Pvt. Ltd. ....Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Vikas Tiwari, Mr. Kumar Deepraj, Ms. Aditi Lekhi, Advocates. For Respondent: Mr. Monish Surendran, Ms. Nishtha Grover, Advocates.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
07.02.2024: I.A. No. 850 of 2024:- This is application filed for recall of the
Judgment dated 06.12.2023 by which the appeal filed by the appellant was
dismissed. In this recall application Learned Counsel for the appellant
submitted that there is an apparent mistake in the order. He refers to a joint
venture agreement pertaining to Sector-92, Gurgaon which was not relevant for
the present case.
The application filed by the appellant is for the recall of the judgment.
The recall of the Judgment is permissible on limited grounds as has been laid
down by five Members Bench of this Tribunal in "Union Bank of India
vs. Dinkar T. Venkatasubramanian & Ors." The order was passed after hearing
the appellant. There are no grounds to allow recall of the Judgment. Appellant -2-
is virtually asking the Court to review of the Judgment whereas there is no
jurisdiction in this Tribunal to review its own judgment. We, thus, are of the
view that recall application cannot be entertained. Recall application is
dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
sa/nn
I.A. No. 850 of 2024 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 542 of 2023
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free