Dr. Surendra Singh Chaudhary vs Rajasvini Bhansali Through Its Power Of ...

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) No. 168 of 2021 IN THE MATTER OF: Dr. Surendra Singh Chaudhary ....Appellant

Vs. Sankheshwar Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents

Present For Appellant: Mr. Naresh Kr. Sejvani, Advocate

For Respondents: Mr. Vinay Garg, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Parv Garg, Mr. Rajendra Singhvi, Mr. Pawas Kulshrestha and Mr. KS, Rekhi, Advocates for R-2 Mr. Rajasvini Bhansali ( R2, in person) ORDER

(Virtual Mode) 03.01.2022: Heard the Learned Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant in

I.A. No. 2922 of 2021. This 'Tribunal' on being subjectively satisfied as to the

reasons ascribed by the Applicant/Appellant in the I.A. No. 2922 of

2021(Condonation of Delay Application) in Comp. App. (AT) No. 168 of 2021,

condones the delay and allows the said application. No costs.

2. Heard both sides in the Main 'Appeal'.

3. The Appellant has preferred the instant Appeal before this Tribunal being

aggrieved against the order dated 17.08.2021 passed by National Company

Law Tribunal, Rajasthan Bench- Jaipur in CP No. 17/241-242/JPR/2018 filed

under the provisions of the Section 241 & 242 of the Companies Act, 2013. -2-

4. As seen from the impugned order dated 17.08.2021, in CA No.

55/JPR/2021, CA No. 56/JPR/2021 in CP No. 17/241-241/JPR/2021 on

17.08.2021, the National Company Law Tribunal (Rajasthan Bench, Jaipur)

had issued notice in the aforesaid Company Applications and directed the

Respondent to file Replies, if any, within three weeks after receipt of the notice

with a copy in advance to the Counsel opposite and Rejoinder thereto, if any be

filed two weeks thereafter with a copy in advance to the counsel opposite and

directed the listing of the matter on 26.10.2021.

5. On going through the impugned order dated 17.08.2021 in CP No.

17/241-242/JPR/2018 filed under the provisions of the Section 241 & 242 of

the Companies Act, 2013, it is quite evident that the National Company Law

Tribunal, Rajasthan Bench, Jaipur had only issued notice in CP No. 17/241-

242/JPR/2018 and CA No. 55/JPR/2021, CA No. 56/JPR/2021 and as such

this 'Tribunal' is of the considered view that the 'Appellant' cannot be

characterised as 'person' who had suffered a legal grievance. As Such this

Tribunal is of the considered view that the present Comp. App. (AT) No. 168 of

2021 is filed by the Appellant is Per se not maintainable in the eye of Law.

Resultantly, the Company Appeal fails.

6. In fine, the Comp. App. (AT) No. 168 of 2021 is dismissed without costs.

Company Appeal (AT) No. 168 of 2021 -3-

7. Before parting with the case, this 'Tribunal' makes it abundantly quite

clear that in the event of the 'Appellant' filing Replies to the main 'Company

Petition' as well as to the CA Nos. in 55/2021 and 56/2021 before the next

date of hearing, it is open to the Appellant to raise all the factual and legal

pleas (including the aspect of maintainability of the Petition in CP No. 17/241-

242/JPR/2018) and to avail its remedy in the manner known to Law and in

accordance with Law if he so desires/advised.

8. All connected pending 'Interlocutory Applications' are closed.

[Justice M. Venugopal] Member (Judicial)

[V.P. Singh] Member (Technical)

[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical)

sr/gc Company Appeal (AT) No. 168 of 2021