Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a company appeal concerning the Appellant's right to file an additional affidavit after the proceedings were remanded by the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellant, Vinod Anand, had initiated proceedings under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, claiming financial mismanagement by the Respondent, Golden Rolls Private Limited. The initial application was dismissed by the NCLT on 09.10.2025, based on findings from earlier proceedings under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, which the Appellate Tribunal later found unsustainable. The Appellate Tribunal remanded the case for fresh consideration, emphasizing that the dismissal of the Section 7 application should not have relied on the earlier findings. Following the remand, the Appellant filed an application to submit an additional affidavit, which was rejected by the NCLT on 29.05.2026. The Appellate Tribunal found that the NCLT had failed to consider the application on its merits and had improperly relied on prior interlocutory orders that had lost relevance after the remand. The Tribunal held that the principles of natural justice required that the Appellant be allowed to present additional evidence to support their case. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the NCLT was directed to accept the additional affidavit, ensuring that the Respondent would have the opportunity to rebut it. The decision reinforced the importance of procedural fairness in judicial proceedings.
Headnote
A) Company Law - Additional Pleadings - Right to File Additional Affidavit - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 - The Tribunal's rejection of the Appellant's application to file an additional affidavit was found to lack consideration on merits, violating principles of natural justice. The Appellate Tribunal emphasized that procedural rules should not hinder a party's right to present their case effectively (Paras 35-37).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the rejection of the Appellant's right to file an additional affidavit after remand was justified.
Final Decision
The appeal was allowed, and the NCLT was directed to accept the additional affidavit filed by the Appellant, ensuring the Respondent could rebut it. All interlocutory applications were closed.
Law Points
- natural justice
- additional affidavit
- procedural rules
- remand order
- NCLT Rules
- Companies Act
- I & B Code
