Tech Vulcan Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. & ... vs Ajay Kumar Jain & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) No. 406 of 2018
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
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