National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Allows Appellant's Request to Expedite Hearing Date. Tribunal Rescheduled Hearing to 13.10.2026 Following Supreme Court's Liberty Granted to Appellant.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: NEW DELHI
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an application for preponing the hearing date in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1507 of 2026. The Appellant, represented by senior counsel, requested to move the hearing date from 29.10.2026 to an earlier date, citing an order from the Supreme Court that granted liberty to make such a request. The Tribunal considered the submissions made by the Appellant's counsel and decided to reschedule the hearing to 13.10.2026, noting the urgency expressed by the Appellant. The Tribunal also stated that any actions taken under the impugned order would be subject to the final decision of the appeal. The application was disposed of accordingly.

Headnote

A) Company Law - Hearing Dates - Preponing of Hearing - Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1507 of 2026 - The Appellant sought to prepone the hearing date from 29.10.2026 to an earlier date based on the liberty granted by the Supreme Court. The Tribunal allowed the request and rescheduled the hearing to 13.10.2026, emphasizing that any further actions would be subject to the final decision of the appeal. Held that the request was justified under the circumstances (Paras 2-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the date of hearing in the appeal can be preponed as per the Supreme Court's liberty granted.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal allowed the Appellant's request to prepone the hearing date from 29.10.2026 to 13.10.2026, stating that any further actions would be subject to the final decision of the appeal.

Law Points

  • Preponing hearing dates
  • Supreme Court liberty
  • Appellate Tribunal procedures
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (10) 85

I.A. No. 7222 of 2026 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1507 of 2026

2026-10-06

Justice Mohammad Faiz Alam Khan, Naresh Salecha

Mr. Sunil Fernandes, Mr. Mohak Nayak, Mr. Shantnu Chourasia, Mr. Kaustubh Rai, Mr. Kailash Ram, Ms. Anushka Vashishth, Mr. Shashank Soni, Mr. Aishvary Vikram, Mr. Lucky Sharma, Mr. Yash Jain

Carnet Elias Fernandes

Jagdish Kumar Parulkar & Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Application for preponing hearing date in a company appeal.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to advance the hearing date.

Filing Reason

Request based on Supreme Court's liberty to make such a request.

Previous Decisions

Supreme Court granted liberty to request an earlier hearing date.

Issues

Whether the hearing date can be preponed as per the Supreme Court's order.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant's counsel argued for an earlier hearing date based on urgency and Supreme Court's order. Resolution Professional's counsel opposed the apprehension shown by the Appellant.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to the Supreme Court's liberty granted to the Appellant for expediting the hearing process.

Judgment Excerpts

The instant application has been moved by the Appellant for preponing the date which has been fixed in this appeal as 29.10.2026 to an early date. Having regard to the liberty granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and keeping in view submissions made by learned senior counsel appearing for the Appellant that the submissions in the appeal may be completed within a very short time, we prepone the date fixed in this appeal from 29.10.2026 to 13.10.2026 under caption ‘Matter Expedited by the Hon’ble Supreme Court’. any further action which may be taken under the impugned order shall be subject to the final decision of this appeal.

Procedural History

The Appellant filed an application to prepone the hearing date, which was originally set for 29.10.2026, citing a Supreme Court order that allowed such a request.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Workmen in Industrial Dispute Case — Clarifies Conditions for Lock-out and Re-employment. The court ruled that the notices issued by the company did not terminate the services of the workmen but allowed them to re...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Sets Aside Interim Order Against Student's Suspension — Upholds University Discipline. The Court emphasized the importance of maintaining discipline in educational institutions and allowed the university to proceed with its inquiry.