Suresh J Bajaj vs Sidharth J Bajaj & Ors

1

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHHI COMPANY APPEAL (AT) NO.257/2025 In the matter of: Suresh J. Bajaj Advocate Vs Sidharth J Bajaj & Ors Respondent For Appellant:Mr Milan Singh Negi, Mr. Nikhil Kumar Jha, Mr Gautam, Mr Ashish Pyasi, Advocates. For Respondent:Appearance not marked. ORDER

HYBRID MODE 07.11.2025: This appeal is filed against an impugned order dated 23.07.2025

whereby the restoration application No.6/2025 in CP/156/MB/2020, filed by

the respondent herein before the Ld. NCLT has been allowed, without giving any

notice to the appellant herein.

2. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant CP bearing

No.156/2020 filed by the respondent was dismissed in default on 05.05.2025

due to non-appearance of respondent herein. Thereafter Restoration Application

No.6/2025 was moved, which application was allowed without even notice to the

appellant herein, and thus it violated the principles of natural justice as also

Rule 37 of the NCLT Rules. Rule 37 of NCLT Rules says as under:-

37. Notice to Opposite Party.- (1) The Tribunal shall issue notice to the respondent to show cause against the application or petition on a date of hearing to be specified in the Notice.

Such notice in Form No. NCLT. 5 shall be accompanied by a copy of the application with supporting documents. 2

(2) If the respondent does not appear on the date specified in the notice in Form No. NCLT. 5, the Tribunal, after according reasonable opportunity to the respondent, shall forthwith proceed ex-parte to dispose of the application.

(3) If the respondent contests to the notice received under sub- rule (1), it may, either in person or through an authorised representative, file a reply accompanied with an affidavit and along with copies of such documents on which it relies, with an advance service to the petitioner or applicant, to the Registry before the date of hearing and such reply and copies of documents shall form part of the record.

3. We have also heard the learned counsel for the Respondent. Admittedly

no notice of restoration application to the appellant herein was ever issued. The

counsel for the appellant has referred to the orders dated 09.07.2022 to

17.02.2025 of Ld. NCLT which clearly indicate that no such notice was issued.

4. Considering the submission on violation of natural justice since the

impugned order has been passed without issuing a notice to the appellant

herein, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to Ld. NCLT so

as to decide the restoration application afresh. The parties shall appear before

the Ld. NCLT on the date fixed.

5. With these observations, the appeal stands disposed of.

6. Pending applications are also closed.

(Justice Yogesh Khanna) Member (Judicial)

(Mr Indevar Pandey) Member (Technical) Bm/rr