Leka Consulting Services Private Limited vs National Company Law Tribunal, Cuttack And Another

Arindam Sinha, J

Mr. Mohapatra, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is order dated 21st August, 2020 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Cuttack Bench (NCLT). His client is Director of Leka Consulting Services Private Limited. Registrar of Companies had struck off name of the company as dissolved on and from 24th October, 2019. His client moved NCLT. In impugned order there is reference to report submitted by Registrar of Companies letter dated 16th March, 2020, wherein it was mentioned that:

"Petitioner may be put to strict proof of the contention made therein that at the time of its striking off the Company was in operation."

He submits, on that his client wants impugned order to be set aside for his client's application being restored, for NCLT to allow his client to explain and provide proof that the company was in operation at the time of striking out.

On query from Court as to why petitioner has not availed statutory remedy of appeal Mr. Mohapatra submits, there has been violation of a principle of natural justice inasmuch as no opportunity to explain and tender the proof was given to his client. In the circumstances, this Court has been moved for interference in writ jurisdiction.

Section 421 in Companies Act, 2013 provides for appeal from orders of the Tribunal to appellate Tribunal. There is further appeal to the Supreme Court. Section 420 provides as follows:

"420. Orders of Tribunal.-(1) The Tribunal may, after giving the parties to any proceeding before it, a reasonable opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit.

(2) The Tribunal may, at any time within two years from the date of the order, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it, and shall make such amendment, if the mistake is brought to its notice by the parties;

Provided that no such amendment shall be made in respect of any order against which an appeal has been preferred under this act.

(3) The Tribunal shall send a copy of every order passed under this section to all the parties concerned."

Petitioner might approach the Tribunal to contend that impugned order be amended on the Tribunal not having allowed his client to adduce evidence of the company being in operation, in context of the report having said that his client may be put to strict proof. If the Tribunal is satisfied, it may amend impugned order. The amendment can be made within two years from date of order, so there is still time. Petitioner has not preferred appeal and, therefore, still entitled to approach the Tribunal.

With above observations, the writ petition is disposed of.