Shivang Prakashchandra Patel & Anr vs Bhavesh Devidas Narumalani
- CitationCompany Appeal(AT) No. 107 of 2020
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an original order of the Tribunal has been carried in appeal and the appellate decision has been rendered, the original order merges with the appellate order, and the Tribunal that passed the original order is not competent to entertain an application for its rectification under Section 420 of the Companies Act, 2013.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Mr. Shivang Prakashchandra Patel & Anr. ...Appellants
Vs
Mr. Bhavesh Devidas Narumalani ....Respondent Present: For Appellants: Mr. Ritin Rai, Sr. Advocate along with Natasha Dhruman Shah, Advocate For Respondent: None.
ORDER
(Through Virtual Mode)
27.07.2020 Heard learned Counsel for the Appellants. The Appeal has
been filed as the I.A. filed by the Appellants for rectification what is stated to be
missing in the decision dated 15.03.2017 read with order dated 26.04.2017
passed by NCLT Ahmedabad Bench has been dismissed. Learned NCLT
Ahmedabad Bench has rejected the Application for reasons recorded and also
observed that since there was an Appeal it cannot be rectified as part. It does
appear that against the initial order of NCLT, Ahmedabad Bench, - copy of which
is at Annexure-A3, there was an Appeal before this Tribunal - copy of the order
of which is at Annexure-A4. When the Appeal was filed and has been decided,
the original order would naturally merge with the order of the Appellate Tribunal
and in such a situation, considering of Section 420 of the Companies Act, 2013,
fault cannot be found with the NCLT Ahmedabad Bench for not entertaining the
Application for rectification. We do not find NCLT Ahmedabad Bench erred in not
entertaining the Application. Learned Counsel for the Appellants has already
Company Appeal (AT) No. 107 of 2020 Page 1 of 2 been given liberty by NCLT Ahmedabad Bench to approach NCLAT Higher
Forum, for alleged rectification. If the Appellant wants to rectify the order passed
by this Tribunal in Appeal, it is for Appellant to see what Application would have
to be filed, which would naturally be considered as per law. We cannot forget
limitation for rectification and the fact that even Judgment of this Tribunal
appears to have been further upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal
No. 2425 of 2018 dated 23.03.2018.
Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
[Justice A.I.S. Cheema] Member(Judicial)
[Justice Venugopal M.] Member (Judicial)
(Kanthi Narahari) Member(Technical)
Akc/Md
Company Appeal (AT) No. 107 of 2020 Page 2 of 2
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