Jayaprakash Narayana Rao vs M/S Metocorp Infrastructure Ltd
- CitationRestoration Application No. 14/2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal may restore an appeal dismissed for want of prosecution where the non-appearance of the appellant's earlier counsel resulted from his name not being recorded in the cause list, and where the grounds pleaded in the restoration application are found to be genuine; upon such a finding the dismissal order is recalled and the appeal restored to its original number.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI (APPELLATE JURISDICTION) Restoration Application No. 14/2024 TA (AT) No.137/2021 (Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1236/2019) In the matter of: Shri Jayaprakash Narayana Rao N.R. ... Appellant/ Applicant V M/s. MetroCorp Infrastructure Ltd. ...Respondent WITH Restoration Application No.18/2024 TA (AT) No.138/2021 (Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.1239/2019) In the matter of: Kartik Kalevar & 14 Ors. ... Appellant/ Applicant V M/s. MetroCorp Infrastructure Ltd. ...Respondent Present : For Appellant : Mr. S M Vivekanandh, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Abhijit Attur, Advocate
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode) 17.12.2024:
These two Company appeals are listed on respective Restoration
Applications, being Restoration Application No. 14/2024 & Restoration
Application No.18/2024. The Respondent's counsel upon being noticed by this
Appellate Tribunal has put an appearance and he prays that he may be permitted
to file his Vakalath on record, he may do so within a period of 2 weeks.
After having heard the learned counsel for the Applicants on the
Restoration Applications and particularly considering the reasons, which have
TA (AT) Nos.137 & 138/2021 Page 1 of 2 been given in para 2 (III) & para 2 (IV), where the previous counsel for the
Appellant was unable to attend the proceedings on the previous date because his
name was not recorded in the cause list. As the grounds taken in these applications
for restoration seem to be genuine, the Restoration Application would stand
allowed.
The respective order dated 21.06.2024 dismissing the appeals for want of
prosecution would stand recalled, and the Company appeals would stand restored
to its original number.
Put up this matter on 13.02.2025 for hearing at admission stage.
[Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial)
[Jatindranath Swain] Member (Technical)
GKJ/TM/MS
TA (AT) Nos.137 & 138/2021 Page 2 of 2
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