National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Dismisses Recall Application in Company Appeal — Observations Not Binding on Adjudicating Authority.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: New Delhi
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a company appeal involving Rathi Powertech Global Pvt. Ltd. and Hannu Steels Pvt. Ltd. The applicant filed I.A. No. 5813 of 2026 seeking to recall specific observations made in the judgment dated 06.07.2026, which were perceived as prejudicial to the ongoing proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority. The applicant contended that the observations in paragraphs 54 and 55 conferred a prima facie judicial imprimatur on the appellant's defense before it had been fully pleaded, potentially influencing the independent adjudication of the pending Section 9 proceedings. The Tribunal reviewed the application and noted that the observations were intended to be prima facie and explicitly stated that the merits of the contentions would be examined independently by the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal emphasized that the Adjudicating Authority was to adjudicate the matter afresh without being influenced by any observations from the judgment. Ultimately, the Tribunal found no merit in the recall application and dismissed it, affirming that the rights and contentions of the parties remained open for adjudication on their merits (Paras 1-9).

Headnote

A) Company Law - Recall of Order - Prima Facie Observations - National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016, Rule 11 - The applicant sought to recall observations made in the previous judgment, arguing they could prejudice the ongoing proceedings. The Tribunal clarified that the observations were prima facie and did not influence the merits of the case, which would be independently examined by the Adjudicating Authority. Held that the application lacked merit and was dismissed (Paras 1-9).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the observations made in paragraphs 54 and 55 of the judgment dated 06.07.2026 should be recalled or modified.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal dismissed the recall application, affirming that the Adjudicating Authority would examine the merits independently without being influenced by the observations made in the judgment dated 06.07.2026.

Law Points

  • Recall of order
  • prima facie observations
  • adjudication on merits
  • opportunity to respond
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (09) 238

I.A. No. 5813 of 2026 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 124 of 2026

2026-07-06

Indevar Pandey, Justice N Seshasayee

Mr. Karan Gandhi

Rathi Powertech Global Pvt. Ltd.

Hannu Steels Pvt. Ltd.

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

Nature of Litigation

Application for recall of judgment in a company appeal.

Remedy Sought

The applicant sought to recall and modify specific observations in the judgment.

Filing Reason

The applicant was aggrieved by observations made in the previous judgment.

Previous Decisions

The judgment dated 06.07.2026 was previously passed in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 124 of 2026.

Issues

Whether the observations in paragraphs 54 and 55 should be recalled or modified.

Submissions/Arguments

The applicant argued that the observations could prejudice ongoing proceedings. The Tribunal clarified that the observations were prima facie and did not influence the merits.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal held that prima facie observations do not bind the Adjudicating Authority, which must adjudicate the matter on its merits independently.

Judgment Excerpts

The observations in para 54 are basically prima facie observations of this Tribunal. We clarify that all rights and contentions of the parties on merits remain open for adjudication before the Adjudicating Authority.

Procedural History

The application was filed after the judgment dated 06.07.2026 was passed in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 124 of 2026.

Acts & Sections

  • National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules: Rule 11
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Restores Acquittal in Murder Case Due to Insufficient Evidence. The High Court's failure to critically examine the trial Court's reasoning led to an unjustified reversal of acquittal.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Lack of Corroboration. Conviction for Sexual Assault Under Sections 4 & 10 of POCSO Act and Section 376(2) IPC Set Aside as Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reas...