Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Tech Vulcan Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. & ... vs Ajay Kumar Jain & Anr

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal26 February 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal cannot decide a matter on its merits, after its transfer, where neither party has been served with notice and neither party's counsel appears; such a decision is made in violation of the principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh notice to the parties.

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

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALNEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) No. 406 of 2018IN THE MATTER OF:

Tech Vulcan Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Appellants

Versus

Ajay Kumar Jain & Anr. ...Respondents

Present:

For Appellant : Mr. Rajendra Beniwal, Advocate

For 1st Respondent: Mr. Ajay Jain in person

ORDER

26.02.2019 Mr. Ajay Kumar Jain and Ms. Seema Jain, petitioners

(respondent herein) filed an application under Section 235, 237, 397, 298, 402,

403 and 405 of the Companies Act, 1956 before the erstwhile Company Law

Board which was transferred to National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru (for

short, 'the Tribunal'). The case was taken up and it was decided on merit by

the impugned judgment dated 31st July, 2018.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that after

transfer of the case before the Tribunal, no notice was served on the appellants

(respondent company before the Tribunal) and even the counsel for the

petitioners (respondent herein) had not appeared. In absence of counsel for the

petitioners (respondent herein) and the counsel for the respondents (appellant

herein) the Tribunal decided the case on merit, which is not permissible in law.

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jain, one of the petitioners appeared in person and submits that -2-

he had written a letter to the Tribunal to exempt him from personal appearance,

however after the transfer of the case, no notice was served on the appellant

company. In the aforesaid circumstances, as the impugned order dated 31st

July, 2018 passed is in violation of principles of natural justice without hearing

the appellant company and in absence of the petitioners, we set aside the

impugned order dated 31st July, 2019 and remit the case to the Tribunal to

decide the case on merit after afresh notice to the parties. The appeal is allowed

with aforesaid observations and no cost.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Member (Judicial)

/ns/uk/

Company Appeal (AT) No. 406 of 2018

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