Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from Company Appeal (AT) No. 67 of 2026, where Bruck Pharma Pvt. Ltd. challenged an interlocutory order issued by the NCLT, Kolkata Bench - III, on 07.01.2026. The appellant contended that the order was flawed as it involved notices to the Enforcement Directorate and Serious Fraud Investigation Office without proper pleading or material on record. During the pendency of the appeal, the related Company Petition No. 13/KB of 2024 was finally decided on 31.07.2026, which the appellant intended to challenge independently. The tribunal noted that the appeal's subject matter no longer existed due to the final judgment in the Company Petition, leading to the conclusion that the appeal would be closed. The court clarified that all contentions could be raised in any future appeal against the judgment rendered on 31.07.2026.
Headnote
A) Company Law - Interlocutory Order - Survival of Appeal - Companies Act, 2013, Section 73 - The Company Appeal was challenged against an interlocutory order for issuance of notices to ED and SFIO, but the related Company Petition was finally decided, rendering the appeal moot. The court held that the appeal would stand closed in light of the subsequent judgment, leaving all contentions open for future appeals (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Company Appeal survives after the final judgment in the related Company Petition.
Final Decision
The Company Appeal was dismissed as the subject matter no longer survived due to the final judgment in the related Company Petition No. 13/KB of 2024.
Law Points
- Interlocutory Order
- Company Appeal
- Section 73 Companies Act
- 2013
Case Details
2026 LawText (NCLAT) (08) 74
Company Appeal (AT) No. 67 of 2026
Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, Arun Baroka, Indevar Pandey
Mr. Milan Singh Negi, Mr. Nikhil Kumar Jha, Ms. Katyayani, Mr. Rishabh Jain, Mr. Alok Kumar, Ms. A. Agarwal, Ms. Kavya, Ms. Shruti Jain
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Company Appeal challenging an interlocutory order of NCLT.
Remedy Sought
The appellant sought to challenge the interlocutory order regarding notices to ED and SFIO.
Filing Reason
The appellant contended that the order was vitiated due to lack of pleading and material.
Previous Decisions
The related Company Petition No. 13/KB of 2024 was decided on 31.07.2026.
Issues
Survival of appeal after final judgment in related petition
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that the interlocutory order was flawed due to lack of proper pleading.
The respondents contended that the appeal became moot after the final judgment in the Company Petition.
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was rendered moot due to the final judgment in the related Company Petition, which addressed the core issues raised in the appeal.
Judgment Excerpts
The challenge, which has been given by the Appellant is to the order of issuance of notices to the Enforcement Directorate (‘ED’) and Serious Fraud Investigation Office (‘SFIO’), without there being any pleading, prayer, material on record, was vitiated in the eyes of law.
Hence, the Company Appeal would stand closed in the light of the Order dated 31.07.2026 as rendered in Company Petition No. 13/KB of 2024.
Procedural History
The appeal was filed against an interlocutory order of the NCLT, which was subsequently rendered moot by a final judgment in the related Company Petition.
Acts & Sections
- Companies Act, 2013: Section 73
