National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Quashes Interim Order in Company Appeal — Procedural Justice Violated. The Tribunal's interim order was quashed due to failure to consider maintainability under Section 244 of the Companies Act, 2013, as the respondent held no shares.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: New Delhi
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from proceedings initiated under the Companies Act, 2013, where the appellant, ET Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd., challenged an interim order granted by the Tribunal in favor of the respondent, Electrotherm (India) Ltd. The respondent had filed an application seeking various interim reliefs, including the right to inspect records and restraining the appellant from alienating assets. The appellant contended that the respondent's application was not maintainable as they held no shares, thus failing to meet the threshold required under Section 244 of the Companies Act. The appellant argued that the Tribunal's decision to grant interim relief was flawed as it did not consider the merits of the case or provide an opportunity for the appellant to respond. The court analyzed the procedural history and noted that the Tribunal had failed to assign reasons for its decision, which is a fundamental requirement in judicial proceedings. The court emphasized that the lack of a response from the appellant should not have been the sole basis for granting interim relief, especially when it affected the rights of the parties involved. Ultimately, the court quashed the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for reconsideration, ensuring that the appellant would have an opportunity to present their case. The court directed that the interim application be decided on its merits after providing a fair hearing to the appellant.

Headnote

A) Company Law - Interim Relief - Maintainability of Application - Companies Act, 2013, Sections 241, 242, 244 - The Tribunal granted interim relief without considering the maintainability of the application under Section 244, as the respondent held zero shares. The court held that the interim order was flawed as it did not provide an opportunity for the appellant to respond, violating principles of natural justice (Paras 6-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the interim relief granted by the Tribunal was maintainable in the absence of a waiver under Section 244 of the Companies Act, 2013.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The impugned order dated 07.12.2022 was quashed, and the matter was remitted back to the NCLT for reconsideration of I.A. No. 19/2021 after providing an effective opportunity of hearing to the appellant.

Law Points

  • Companies Act
  • 2013
  • Sections 241
  • 242
  • 244
  • interim relief
  • natural justice
  • maintainability
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (09) 135

COMP. APP. (AT) NO. 8 OF 2023 & I.A. NO. 5944 OF 2026

2026-09-30

Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Indevar Pandey

Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Ms. Shankari Mishra, Ms. Aprajita, Mr. Chandra Shekhar Yadav, Mr. Manan Shishodia

ET Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Electrotherm (India) Ltd.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against an interim order granted by the Tribunal in a company petition.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to quash the interim order and remand the matter for reconsideration.

Filing Reason

The respondent filed for interim relief in the context of a company petition.

Previous Decisions

The Tribunal had allowed the interim prayers without considering the maintainability of the application.

Issues

Maintainability of interim relief application Violation of natural justice principles

Submissions/Arguments

The respondent held zero shares, making the application not maintainable under Section 244. The Tribunal failed to provide an opportunity for the appellant to respond before granting interim relief.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal must assign reasons for its orders, especially when affecting the rights of parties, and failure to do so vitiates the order.

Judgment Excerpts

The Tribunal granted interim relief without considering the maintainability of the application under Section 244. The lack of a response from the appellant should not have been the sole basis for granting interim relief.

Procedural History

The appellant filed an appeal against the interim order granted by the Tribunal in the company petition proceedings.

Acts & Sections

  • Companies Act, 2013: 241, 242, 244
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Auction Sale in Co-operative Bank Recovery for Non-Compliance with Rule 107 of Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Rules, 1961. Sale Set Aside Due to Failure to Follow Mandatory Procedure and Lack of Proper Notice to Borrower...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Hindu Succession Act Interpretation Case — Clarifies Applicability of Sections 6 and 8. The court determined that the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 apply to the succession opened in 1989, emphasizing th...