NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Allows Delay in Re-filing and Rectification of Judgment. The Tribunal condoned a delay of 76 days in re-filing and permitted corrections to be made in a previous judgment to ensure accuracy.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: New Delhi
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The matter before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal involved two applications, I.A. No. 5726 and I.A. No. 5765 of 2026, concerning Comp. App. (AT) No. 399 of 2024. The first application sought condonation of a delay of 76 days in re-filing, which the Tribunal allowed based on the reasons provided by the appellant's counsel. The second application was for rectification of the judgment dated 19.03.2026, where the counsel indicated that certain corrections were necessary. The Tribunal considered the submissions and decided to allow the corrections as stated in a prior order dated 20.08.2026, thereby ensuring that the earlier judgment accurately reflected the intended decisions. The Tribunal disposed of both applications, allowing the delay and the rectification, thereby facilitating the proper administration of justice.

Headnote

A) Procedural Law - Delay Condonation - Application for Delay in Re-filing - National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 - The Tribunal condoned a delay of 76 days in re-filing the application based on the reasons provided. The application was allowed to ensure that the matter could be heard on its merits (Paras 1-1).

B) Procedural Law - Rectification of Judgment - Application for Rectification - National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 - The Tribunal allowed corrections to be made in the earlier judgment dated 19.03.2026 as specified in a subsequent order, ensuring clarity and accuracy in the judgment (Paras 2-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the delay in re-filing the application should be condoned and if corrections in the previous judgment are warranted.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal allowed the application for condonation of delay and permitted the corrections to be made in the earlier judgment dated 19.03.2026.

Law Points

  • Delay condonation
  • Rectification of judgment
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (09) 236

Comp. App. (AT) No. 399 of 2024

2026-09-22

Justice Yogesh Khanna, Barun Mitra

Mr. Gaurav Navi, Ms. Bhairavi SN, Mr. Tenzin Negi, Ms. Adwitiya Ray

Aiko Builders Pvt Ltd. & Ors.

Aloukik City LLP & Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Application for delay in re-filing and rectification of judgment

Remedy Sought

Condonation of delay and correction of previous judgment

Filing Reason

Delay in re-filing and need for corrections in the judgment

Previous Decisions

Judgment dated 19.03.2026 required corrections as per order dated 20.08.2026

Issues

Condonation of delay in re-filing Rectification of previous judgment

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant sought to condone the delay of 76 days in re-filing Appellant's counsel requested corrections in the judgment dated 19.03.2026

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal emphasized the importance of allowing corrections to ensure the accuracy of judicial orders and the necessity of condoning delays to facilitate justice.

Judgment Excerpts

We allow the application for the reasons given in the application. Considering the submissions and nature of the application, we dispose of this application by holding the corrections as are stated in paragraph 2 in our order dated 20.08.2026 be read in our earlier judgment dated 19.03.2026.

Procedural History

The Tribunal received applications I.A. No. 5726 and I.A. No. 5765 of 2026 concerning Comp. App. (AT) No. 399 of 2024, which were heard and disposed of on 22.09.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • National Company Law Tribunal Rules:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Karnataka High Court Dismisses Appellant's Specific Performance Suit for Lack of Readiness and Willingness — Agreement Holder Not Entitled to Equitable Relief. Concurrent findings affirmed that appellant failed to prove readiness and willingness un...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Conditional Order Setting Aside Ex-Parte Decree in Eviction Suit. Court upholds condition of depositing arrears of rent as a valid exercise of discretion under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC.