Miss Lucy
← All judgments

K. Surekha vs Sarvottam Ispat Limited

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal7 July 2023

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal may dismiss an appeal for want of diligent prosecution where neither party is represented on the date fixed for hearing, after the matter has been adjourned once in the interest of justice and the parties' engaged counsel on record have still not appeared.

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

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALCHENNAI BENCH(APPELLATE JURISDICTION)TA (AT) No. 210/2021(Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1396/2019)

In the matter of : K. Surekha ...Appellant V Sarvottam Ispat Limited ...Respondent Present: For Appellant : No Appearance For Respondent : No Appearance ORDER

(Virtual Mode) 07/07/2023:

As seen from the 'Minutes of the 'Adjudication Proceedings' of the

instant TA (AT) No. 210/2021 (Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.

1396/2019), it comes to light that there was no representation on the side of

the 'Appellant' and even when the matter was listed on 02/05/2023, it was

minuted by this 'Tribunal' that 'no one has put in appearance', on behalf of

the 'Appellant' that in the interest of Justice, the matter was adjourned to

23/06/2023 and from 23/06/2023, once again the matter was directed to be

listed on 07/07/2023.

'Today', i.e. on 07/07/2023, at 11.59 a.m., there is no representation

on either side. Considering the fact that there is no representation on the side

of the 'Appellant' and on the side of the 'Respondent', though the Parties

T.A. (AT) No. 210/2021 Page 1 of 2 have engaged the Learned Counsels who are on Record, this 'Tribunal' is

left with no option, at this stage, to dismiss the instant TA(AT) No. 210/2021

(Company Appeal (AT) No. 1396/2019), 'for want of diligent Prosecution'.

No Costs. Connected Pending 'Interlocutory Applications', if any, are

'closed'.

[Justice M. Venugopal] Member (Judicial)

[Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical) SPR/NG

T.A. (AT) No. 210/2021 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