Manas Sarkar vs Anil Anchalia & Ors
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 05 of 2026
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the Adjudicating Authority has disposed of a Company Petition on the strength of an earlier closure order, and that earlier order has not been challenged and has become final, with no interlocutory application pending, the disposal of the petition on that basis discloses no error warranting interference in appeal.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Manas Sarkar & Anr. ...Appellant(s)
Versus
Anil Anchaila & Ors. ...Respondent(s)
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Nilushree Chatterjee, Mr. Nilanjan Chatterjee, Mr. Anirban Choudhary, Advocates For Respondents :
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
14.01.2026 I.A. No. 16 of 2026 : This is an Application praying for
condonation of five days delay in filing of the Appeal.
We find sufficient cause shown to condone the delay.
Delay condoned.
I.A. No. 7969 of 2025 :
This is an Application praying for condonation of 42 days delay in refiling of
present Appeal.
We find sufficient cause shown in the Paragraph 4 of the Application.
Refiling delay condoned.
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 05 of 2026 : This Appeal has been filed against
the order passed by Adjudicating Authority on 26/08/2025, which order
reads as follows :-
"In view of the fact that no IA is pending and there is already a closer Order dated 18/12/2024, the CP stands disposed of."
2. The Adjudicating Authority in the above order has noticed the earlier closer order dated 18/12/2024, relying on the same, C.P. was disposed of.
3. It is not shown that earlier closer order dated 18/12/2024 has been challenged and have become final.
4 When the closer order has become final and no I.A. is pending, we do not find any error in the order of the Adjudicating Authority disposing of the C.P.
5. There is no merit in the Appeal. Appeal dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Prerana/md
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