Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Chander Shekhar Arya vs Sameer Vasudev

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal19 May 2025

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

An order that dismisses an application without giving any reason is not a speaking order and violates the principle of natural justice; such an order is liable to be set aside and the matter remanded to the Tribunal to decide the application afresh and pass a reasoned, speaking order, taking into account the pleadings and evidence led by the applicant on the cause of non-appearance.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 290 of 2025

IN THE MATTER OF: Chander Shekhar Arya ...Appellant

Versus

Sameer Vasudeva & Ors. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Abhijit Mittal, Mr. Anukalp Jain, Ms. Shaivya Singh, Ms. Niharika Sinha, Advocates. For Respondents : Ms. Jaismeen Sharma, Advocate.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

Per: Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Oral)

19.05.2025: This appeal is directed against the order dated 08.01.2025

by which the Ld. Tribunal has dismissed the application of the appellant

bearing Rest.A1/2025 by which the appellant has prayed for restoration of

I.A. No. 520 of 2021 filed in CP (IB)-429(ND)/2019 which was dismissed for

non-prosecution on 26.11.2024.

2. Notice in the appeal was issued and all the six respondents were

served but except Respondent No.3 no one had put in appearance,

therefore, they were proceeded against ex-parte on 15.05.2025. Counsel for

Respondent No. 3 has submitted that she has no objection if the appeal is

allowed and the order dated 08.01.2025 is set aside and the matter is

remanded back.

3. Counsel for the appellant has argued that the Ld. Tribunal has

passed the impugned order without looking into the fact that the non-

Cont'd.../ -2-

appearance of the counsel at the time of hearing in the application on

26.11.2024 was on account of illness which has not been referred to at all

in the impugned order.

4. We have heard the counsel for the parties and after examining the

record are of the considered opinion that the Ld. Tribunal has dismissed

the application of the appellant without giving any reason. Therefore, the

impugned order is not a speaking order and is in violation of the principle

of natural justice.

5. Thus, in view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present

appeal is allowed and the order dated 08.01.2025 is set aside The matter is

remanded back to the Ld. Tribunal, seized of the matter to decide

Rest.A1/2025 afresh, after taking into consideration the pleadings and the

evidence led by the appellant in regard to non-appearance on 26.11.2024

and pass a speaking order. The parties are directed to appear before the

Tribunal on 29.05.2025.

[Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial)

[Mr. Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical)

[Mr. Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical) SA/RR

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 290 of 2025

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