Miss Lucy
← All judgments

K.Sekar vs M.Shreedevi

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal19 April 2023

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal's power to recall or review its own order is not conferred by the statute; a Tribunal constituted under the Companies Act, 2013 that has no express power of review cannot entertain an application seeking review of its own final order, and an application for recall framed as a review is liable to be dismissed on that ground.

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) Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 36/2023 (IA Nos. 358, 360/2023)) (Filed under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013) (Arising out of the Impugned Order dated 21/11/2019 in C.A./1248/2019, passed by the Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench) In the matter of: K. Sekar & Anr. ...Appellants V M. Shreedevi & 3 Ors. ...Respondents Present : For Appellants : Mr. B. Arvind Srevatsa, Advocate.

For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr. P.H. Arvind Pandian, Senior Advocate For Mr. C.V. Shailandhran, Advocates.

(ORAL) ORDER

(Virtual Mode)

[Per; Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (JM)]

19/04/2023: This Appeal is directed against the Order dated

13.01.2023, by which, an Application filed by the Appellant for recall of the

Order dated 21.11.2019 passed in CA/1248/2019 has been dismissed, inter

alia on the ground that the Tribunal does not enjoy the Power of Review.

2. Although, Counsel for the Appellant has argued vehemently that the

Hon'ble Madras High Court in the Writ Petition filed by the Appellant

bearing WP No.14009/2020 decided on 22.04.2021 given liberty to the

Appellant to again approach the Tribunal with an Application for

Comp App (AT) (CH) No. 36/2023 Page 1 of 2 Recall/Review but since there is no Power of Review is provided in the

statute, therefore, the Application filed by the Appellant has rightly been

dismissed by the Tribunal.

3. No other point has been raised.

4. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the Appeal is found

to be without any merit and the same fails and is hereby dismissed. No costs.

[Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial)

[Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical)

himanshu/md

Comp App (AT) (CH) No. 36/2023 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