AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
IA No.3481/2025: This application has been filed by the appellant for exemption from filing certified copy of impugned order dated 10.06.2025. The appellant submits that the certified copy of the order passed by Ld. NCLT in IA No.84/2025 is still awaited and has been applied for. The present appeal is being preferred on the basis of order uploaded on 17.06.2025 on the website. Appellant undertakes to place on record the certified copy of the impugned order forthwith upon its availability. Considering the submission made by the appellant, IA No.3481/2025 is allowed and the appellant is directed to file the certified copy of the impugned order within two weeks from today.
IA No.3482/2025: This application has been filed by the appellant for exemption from filing typed legible copies of the dim pages of the annexures. The reasons for non filing the same are given in the application. Considering the submission made by the appellant, IA No.3482/2025 is allowed and the appellant is directed to file typed legible copies of the dim annexures within two weeks from today.
This appeal is filed against an impugned order dated 10.06.2025. It is the submission of the learned senior counsel for the appellant the consent of the appellant has been wrongly recorded in para 6 of the impugned order.
Paras 5 and 6 of the impugned order read as below:-
“5.We also record the statement of Respondent that the Petitioner is at liberty to subscribe for the rights issue which would be kept open till 14.06.2025. The said statement is taken on record and the Respondent Company shall be bound by the same. However, it is submitted that the issue in question is also about whether the shareholding of approximately 212.56% held by R-7 can be transmitted to the Petitioners or not and the Hon’ble High Court is seized of the matter in administration suit. Therefore, the Petitioners may subscribe for that portion also subject to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.
6.The Petitioners have agreed to the said proposition and in case the Petitioner subscribe to the rights issue considering the 22.56% of R-7’s shareholding, the amount may be utilized by the company for the purpose for which rights issue are made, but the entitlement of rights issue shall be subject to the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.”
It is the submission of the learned senior counsel for the appellant on 10.06.2025 the matter was listed before the Ld. NCLT and the appellant never gave any consent for such order and based on oral dictation, the appellant filed the present appeal upon gist of such order but later when they received the copy of the order, they were shocked to note their consent was recorded wrongly in para 6 thereof, hence an application viz IA No.84/2025 for clarification and the correction of the order dated 10.06.2025 was moved before the Ld. NCLT.
The learned senior counsel for the Respondent submits till such application IA No.84/2025 is disposed of by the Ld. NCLT this appeal would not be maintainable in view of sub-section (2) of Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013 which read as under:-
421. Appeal from orders of Tribunal.—
(1)xxxx
(2)No appeal shall lie to the Appellate Tribunal from an order made by the Tribunal with the consent of parties.
In view of the submissions made by the Learned counsel, it would be appropriate to await the decision of IA No.84/2025.
The matter be listed now on 05.08.2025.