Sandeep Mittal vs Asrec India Ltd & Ors & Ors
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 37 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A modification or clarification application seeking to alter a costs direction in a final judgment of the Tribunal, filed after an unexplained delay of over two years and without disclosing that the judgment had been affirmed by the Supreme Court, is not entertained: an applicant who conceals material facts does not come with clean hands and is disentitled to consideration on merits. Where a Tribunal judgment has attained finality by the Supreme Court's affirmance, the judgment, in its form or any part of it, cannot be disturbed by a recall or modification application, and such an application is misconceived and is rejected.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Sandeep Mittal (Suspended Director of Shree ...Appellant Industries Ltd.)
Versus
ASREC (India) Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Adv. Usha Singh, Adv. Shahrukh Inam, Advocates. For Respondents : Adv. Rahul Gupta, Adv. Rahul Dadhich, Adv. Garima Mankotia, Advocates.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
01.10.2026 This Tribunal, by judgment dated 13.12.2023, had finally
adjudicated upon the Company Appeal (AT) No. 573/2023 on its merits. By
virtue of an observation made by this Tribunal in Para 46, a cost of Rs. 1 Lakh
was directed to be imposed, subject to certain conditions contained in it.
2. The Appellant, by virtue of this modification/clarification application,
which has been preferred on 15.09.2026, after a lapse of almost over 2 years,
had prayed for modifying Para 46 of the judgment as regards the aspect
pertaining to the imposition of cost.
3. The Appellant has not been fair to this Tribunal as he has not come with
cleans hands and has concealed material facts, while filing this application for
seeking clarification/modification of the order dated 13.12.2023, and the
reason for it is that the Counsel for the Respondent has informed, that the
judgment was carried and challenged before the Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 12210 of 2024 in M/s ASREC India Ltd. Vs. Sandeep Mittal and
Ors., and the same has been affirmed by the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex
Court dated 11.08.2026.
4. By concealing the aforesaid fact the modification application has been
filed, that itself disentitles any consideration on merits.
5. In these eventualities, where the judgment of this Tribunal has already
attained finality by the orders of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the judgment in its
form or any part of judgment contained in it cannot be permitted to be
disturbed by virtue of a recall application/modification application. Hence, the
modification application itself is misconceived and the same is accordingly
rejected.
[Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma] Member (Judicial)
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)
MT/RR
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