Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Peopleâ’S All India Anti-Corruption ... vs Usha International Ltd. & Ors

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal14 November 2022

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The restoration order rests on the Tribunal's finding, on the facts disclosed in the restoration petition, that the appellant's counsel's non-appearance was not intentional but arose from a cause beyond his control, and that this justified restoring an appeal dismissed for non-prosecution. The Tribunal expressly reserves any opinion on the delay in refiling the appeal, leaving that question to be decided at admission of the main appeal.

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

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHIRestoration Application No. 13 of 2022InCompetition Appeal (AT) No. 46 of 2022

IN THE MATTER OF: People's All India Anti-Corruption and ...Appellant Crime Prevention Society (IP) Versus Usha International Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents Present: For Appellant : Mr. Nikhilesh Kumar, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Pawan Sharma, Mr. Anuj Shah, Advocates for R-1. Ms. Shama Nargis, Deputy Director for CCI.

ORDER

14.11.2022: Heard.

The Present Application has been filed for Restoration of Competition

Appeal (AT) No. 46 of 2022 which stood dismissed due to non-prosecution on

13.10.2022.

Ld. Counsel for the Appellant Mr. Nikhilesh Kumar by way of referring to

fact disclosed in the restoration petition submits that non-appearance was not

intentional. He failed to appear due to the reason which was beyond his

control.

After hearing Ld. Counsel for the Appellant Mr. Nikhilesh Kumar, Mr.

Pawan Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent No. 1 as well as Deputy

Director CCI, Ms. Shama Nargis and considering the facts and circumstances,

we consider it appropriate to allow the restoration petition. Accordingly, the

restoration petition is allowed. It is directed to be restored on its original file. -2-

It is made clear that the Appeal itself was belatedly refiled i.e. after

expiry of 223 days. At the moment we are not recording any opinion on the

point of delay. It will be kept open to be decided at the time of admission of the

main Appeal.

After restoration, the Appeal is directed to be listed on 14.12.2022.

[Justice Rakesh Kumar] Member (Judicial)

[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical)

sr/gc

Restoration Application No. 13 of 2022 In Competition Appeal (AT) No. 46 of 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