Nimisha Nihar Doctor vs Malabar Enviro Vision Private Limited
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal, being subjectively satisfied that the appellants had shown sufficient cause for a delay of nine days beyond the forty-five-day limit for appeal, condoned the delay, adopting a lenient, liberal and purposeful approach to secure the ends of justice. Thereafter, on the appellants' counsel seeking leave to withdraw the appeal, the appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, with connected interlocutory applications closed; the order rests on the withdrawal request and records no further reasoning on the merits.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1082/2022 in Company Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022 & IA Nos.1079, 1080, and 1081 (Under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013) (Arising out of the Order dated 15.07.2022 in Review Application No.(C/Act)/3/KOB/2022 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Kochi Bench)
In the matter of: Nimisha Nihar Doctor & Anr. ...Petitioners / Applicants / Appellants V Malabar Enviro Vision Pvt. Ltd. & Oths. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellants : Mr. Dhiren R. Dave, Advocate
For Respondent No.1 Caveator : Ms. Rema Smrithi, Advocate
ORDER
(Virtual Mode) 05.01.2023: Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners / Applicants /
Appellants in IA/1082/2022 in Comp. App. (AT) (CH) No.124/2022.
The Petitioners / Applicants / Appellants have preferred the instant
Comp. App. (AT) (CH) No.124/2022, before this 'Tribunal' with a delay
of '9 Days', on being dissatisfied with the 'impugned order' dated
IA/1082 in Company Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022 Page 1 of 4 & Company Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022 15.07.2022 passed by the 'National Company Law Tribunal', Kochi
Bench in 'Review Application No.(C/Act)/3/KOB/2022.
The grievance of the 'Appellant' is that the 'impugned order' came
to be uploaded on 20.07.2022 on the National Company Law Tribunal,
Kochi Bench 'website', and after completion of '45 Days' on 03.09.2022,
an 'Appeal' came to be filed on 07.09.2022, wherein the 'Affidavit' was
executed on 26.08.2022, which was well within the 'prescribed period' of
'45 Days'.
In view of the fact that there was no 'Local Advocate' at Kochi,
Kerala, and even at Chennai for preferring an 'Appeal', the 'Appellant'
later on identified an 'Advocate' at Chennai and preferred an 'Appeal'
and in that 'process', there has occasioned a delay of '9 Days' in
preferring the instant Comp. App. (AT) (CH) No.124/2022.
The reason ascribed on behalf of the 'Appellant' for the delay of '9
Days' in preferring the instant Comp. App. (AT) (CH) No.124/2022, after
the expiry of '45 Days' time limit, is that there was heavy rainfall in the
City of Chennai, and only because of that reason, the 'Affidavit' was duly
executed with an 'Appeal Memo' dated 26.08.2022 could not be delivered
in time.
Considering the fact that the 'Appellants' have ascribed 'sufficient
reasons' in the 'Affidavit' in IA/1082/2022 in Comp. App. (AT) (CH)
IA/1082 in Company Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022 Page 2 of 4 & Company Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022 No.124/2022, this 'Tribunal', on being subjectively satisfied as to the
'sufficient cause', for the delay in question, 'condones' '9 Days' of
'Delay' in preferring the instant Comp. App. (AT) (CH) No.124/2022, by
adopting a lenient, liberal, practical and a purposeful view, to secure the
'ends of Justice'. Accordingly, IA/1082/2022 in Comp. App. (AT) (CH)
No.124/2022 is 'Allowed'. No Costs.
Company Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022 & IA Nos.1079, 1080, and 1081 (Under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013) (Arising out of the Order dated 15.07.2022 in Review Application No.(C/Act)/3/KOB/2022 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Kochi Bench)
In the matter of:
Nimisha Nihar Doctor & Anr. ... Appellants V Malabar Enviro Vision Pvt. Ltd. & Oths. ...Respondents
Present:
For Appellants : Mr. Dhiren R. Dave, Advocate
For Respondent No.1 Caveator : Ms. Rema Smrithi, Advocate
ORDER (Virtual Mode)
05.01.2023: The Learned Counsel for the 'Appellant' Mr. Dhiren R. Dave
seeks permission from this 'Tribunal' to withdraw the instant Comp. App.
IA/1082 in Company Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022 Page 3 of 4
& Company Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022 (AT) (CH) No.124/2022. Acceding to his said request, the instant Comp.
App. (AT) (CH) No.124/2022 is 'dismissed' as 'withdrawn'. No Costs.
The Connected IA No.1079/2022 (for 'Interim Stay'), 1080/2022 (For
'Exemption'), 1081/2022 (For 'Exemption') are Closed.
[Justice M. Venugopal] Member (Judicial)
[Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical)
ghk/tm
IA/1082 in Company Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022 Page 4 of 4 & Company Appeal (AT)(CH) No.124/2022
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