Mr Siddhartha Mitra vs India Steam Laundry Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) No. 290 of 2026
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
An interlocutory procedural order of the Tribunal, which decides nothing on the merits and merely directs the parties to proceed diligently before the NCLT, is not an order from which an appeal lies under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013; an adjournment granted by the Tribunal, even where it had earlier observed that no further adjournments would be granted, does not thereby confer a right to invoke appellate jurisdiction against such an order.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Mr. Siddhartha Mitra ...Appellants Versus India Steam Laundry (P) Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Krishnendu Datta and Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Sr. Advocates with Mr. Kunal Chatterjee, Ms. Matrayee Banerjee and Mr. Yash Tandon, Advocates. For Respondents : Mr. Joy Saha, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Subhajit Saha Advocates.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
28.07.2026: Looking to the nature of the order that, has been made as
subject matter of challenge in the instant company appeal. As a matter of
fact, it doesn't decide the lis in itself on merits rather its only procedural with
regards to the necessity of the parties to the proceedings to diligently take the
proceedings before the Ld. NCLT, despite the earlier orders, being passed for
deciding the company petition expeditiously, there had been an observation
made by the Tribunal in its earlier order that, no further adjournments would
be granted. We make it clear that, even if such an order is passed by the Ld.
Tribunal observing thereof that no further adjournments will be granted, still
owing to unforeseen circumstances if an adjournment is sought or and is
granted that, in itself will not give the liberty to the appellate, to invoke the
appellate jurisdiction by invoking the appellate provisions contained under Section 421 of the 'Companies Act', to challenge the order of this nature,
which reads as under:-
Looking into the nature of the order, we are not inclined to interfere in
the company appeal, the company appeal stands dismissed. We, however,
requests the Ld. NCLT to expedite the proceedings of TP No. 445/KB/2019,
and to decide the same as expeditiously as possible, within a period of three
months from today. Company Appeal (AT) No. 290 of 2026, accordingly,
would stand dismissed.
[Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)
[Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical) harleen/Ravi
2 of 2 Company Appeal (AT) No. 290 of 2026
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