National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Clarifies Interim Order in Appeal Proceedings. The court clarified that the directions regarding affidavit submissions would continue until the next hearing, ensuring procedural compliance.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: NEW DELHI
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The matter involved an application for clarification/modification of an order dated 17/07/2026 in the context of an appeal filed by Gajra Brothers against Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Ltd. (IL&FS). The appellant sought to clarify that the words 'Interim order to continue' were recorded inadvertently. The court noted that on 29/05/2026, directions were issued allowing IL&FS three weeks to file an affidavit, with a rejoinder affidavit to be filed within two weeks, and that any action taken in pursuance of the impugned order would abide by the result of the appeal. The court decided that the directions would continue until the next date of hearing, thus disposing of the application. Additionally, another application for urgent listing of the appeal was also disposed of. The presiding members included Justice Yogesh Khanna and Ajai Das Mehrotra.

Headnote

A) Company Law - Modification of Interim Orders - Clarification of Directions - National Company Law Tribunal Act, 2016 - The application sought clarification of an interim order recorded inadvertently, with directions for filing affidavits and the continuation of directions until the next hearing. Held that the directions shall continue as stated (Paras 1-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the interim order recorded inadvertently should be clarified or modified

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court clarified that the directions regarding affidavit submissions would continue until the next date of hearing and disposed of the application for urgent listing.

Law Points

  • Clarification of orders
  • modification of interim orders
  • procedural directions
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (08) 103

I.A. No. 5304 of 2026 in Comp. App. (AT) No. 68 of 2026

2026-08-05

Justice Yogesh Khanna, Ajai Das Mehrotra

Mr. Vivek Punjabi, Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Mr. Pushpendra S. Bhadoriya, Mr. Kuber Dewan, Ms. Neeharika Aggarwal, Mr. Kaustubh Srivastava

Gajra Brothers

Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Ltd. (IL&FS)

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

Nature of Litigation

Application for clarification/modification of an interim order

Remedy Sought

Clarification of the interim order recorded inadvertently

Filing Reason

To ensure compliance with procedural directions regarding affidavit submissions

Previous Decisions

Order dated 17/07/2026 regarding interim directions

Issues

Clarification of inadvertently recorded interim order Continuation of procedural directions

Submissions/Arguments

Counsel for appellant argued for clarification of the interim order Counsel for IL&FS requested time to file an affidavit

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized the importance of clarity in procedural directions and upheld the need for compliance with the established timeline for affidavit submissions.

Judgment Excerpts

This application is filed for clarification/ modification of an order dated 17/07/2026 The directions, as above, shall continue till the next date of hearing.

Procedural History

Application filed for clarification of an interim order, directions issued on 29/05/2026, subsequent hearing scheduled for 17/07/2026.

Acts & Sections

  • National Company Tribunal Act:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appellant in Municipal Lease Eviction Dispute; Holds No Contract Concluded and Tenant by Sufferance Not Entitled to Notice. Section 80 of Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act Required Corporation Sanction for Commissioner'...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Petition to Quash Order Refusing Discharge in Criminal Case — Sanction Requirement Under Section 197 CrPC Not Applicable to Retired Police Officers for Acts Done in Official Capacity.