Manoj Properties Private Limited & Anr vs N/A
- CitationComp. App. (AT) No.400 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's power to restore a company petition dismissed for non-prosecution is exercised where the appellant's explanation for the default, set out in its restoration application, is found sufficient, and the Tribunal considers that no party will be prejudiced by restoration; on that footing the dismissal order and the order refusing restoration may be set aside, subject to costs.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Manoj Properties Pvt. Ltd. ....Appellant
Vs.
Railanchor India Pvt. Ltd. ....Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Sahil Ghai and Mr. Kunal Negi, Advocates For Respondent:
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode) 2.1.2025 - This Appeal is against an impugned Order dated 18th
September, 2024 vide which the Restoration Application No.36 of 2024 filed by
the Appellant to restore the Company Petition (admittedly dismissed in default
vide an Order dated 5th August, 2024) was dismissed.
2. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Appellant, the Appellant
had appeared on each and every date prior to 5th August, 2024 and even on
5.8.2024, the main Counsel had logged in through VC but could not make his
submissions before the learned NCLT due to some issue in his device as he could
not switch on its audio video mode during the hearing and that it was
only because of this reason, the petition i.e. CP (CAA) No.74/ND/2021
was dismissed for non-prosecution. It is the submission of the
learned Counsel for the Appellant, the appearance of the
Appellant was even recorded on 10th June, 2022 and thereafter
the matter was adjourned on various occasions due to paucity of time as it did 2
not reach for arguments. In any case, it is submitted no one shall be prejudiced
if the Petition is restored to its original number since it is a case of amalgamation;
the first motion having been allowed and this petition was for second motion.
3. Considering the submissions and the explanation given in para - 3 of the
Application for restoration, we are of the opinion the Order dated 18th September,
2024 needs to be set aside subject to cost of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited with
the Prime Minister's Relief Fund within four weeks from today.
4. In view of the above, the Order dated 18th September, 2024 and
consequently, the Order dated 5th August, 2024 are set aside. The Appeal is thus
allowed. The Company Petition No. CP (CAA) No.74/ND/2021 is restored to its
original number. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
[Justice Yogesh Khanna] Member (Judicial)
[Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical)
rs/md
Comp. App. (AT) No.400 of 2024
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