Harsh Garg vs M/S. Royal Clubs Of India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) No. 327 of 2017
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's clarification of an interim order, which left its substance unchanged, did not require a fresh hearing of the affected party before it could be made; no substantial change to the interim relief having been effected, there was no ground to remit the matter for hearing on the question of passing another interim order.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Harsh Garg ...Appellant
Versus
M/s. Royal Clubs of India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents
Present:
For Appellant : Shri P. Nagesh, Shri Dhruv Gupta and Ms. Eshna Kumar, Advocate
ORDER
12.10.2017 This appeal has been preferred by the appellant - petitioner
against order dated 2nd August, 2017 passed by the National Company Law
Tribunal, Allahabad Bench (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') whereby
and whereunder the interim order passed by the Tribunal on 13th July, 2017
was explained as follows:
"In the result, the whole order dated 13.07.2017, henceforth to be
reads as under:
"Keeping in view of this and to protect the interest of both the
parties, the respondent co. is expected to maintain status quo
as of today on its fixed assets and immovable property and not
to create third party interest thereon except its lease, rental
business and day to day routine works including lease of
immovable property along with any equipment, machinery,
furniture and fixtures."
Thus, the Misc. Application No. 146/2017 is allowed and accordingly
stands disposed of."
2. One of the grievances of the appellant is that he was not heard when the
order dated 13th July, 2017 was explained by the impugned order dated 2nd
August, 2017 but in view of the fact that the Tribunal has merely explained the
earlier interim order in the interest of the company and as no substantial change
has been made, we find no ground to remit the matter for hearing the case on
the question of passing another interim order. We hope that the main case will
be decided at an early date.
3. Parties should co-operate with the Tribunal. The appeal is dismissed. No
cost.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[ Justice A.I.S. Cheema ] [ Balvinder Singh ] Member (Judicial) Member (Technical)
/ns/uk/
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