AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
The learned counsel for the Appellant has agitated his grievances, being aggrieved as against the Impugned Order dated 28.01.2025, as it was rendered in CA. No. 16/2025 as preferred in C.P.No.01/BB/2025. In fact, and as apparent from records too, by virtue of the Order passed on 28.01.2025, there were various orders, which were passed by the learned Tribunal, on other pending Interlocutory Applications too, including the application being CA No. 16/2025, which is presently the subject matter of consideration in the instant appeal. Hence, the findings recorded by this Appellate Tribunal, would be treated to be a finding qua C.A. No. 16 of 2025 only.
The record reveals that in the proceedings under Sections 241, 242 & 244 of the Companies Act, 2013, which is presently a subject matter of consideration, before the learned NCLT, Bangalore, the Appellant has preferred an Interlocutory Application, under Section 242(4) of the Companies Act, 2013, praying for an appointment of an administrator so as to regulate affairs of Respondent No.1 Company, the relief as sought for in the said application is extracted hereunder:-
“In light of the foregoing facts and submissions, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to:
a)Appoint an Administrator from the panel of the Tribunal to regulate the affairs of the 1st Respondent Company, including but not limited to conducting the meetings, regulating the operational and managerial matters, supervising the maintenance of books of accounts, monitoring the income and expenditure, bank related transactions of Respondent No.1 Company, at the cost and expenses of the Company, to the exclusion of Respondents No.2 to 7, pending disposal of the Company Petition, in the interest of justice and equity.
b)Pass any such orders as may be appropriate, in the interests of justice.”
When the motion was carried before the Learned Tribunal on the said CA No. 16/2025, the learned NCLT, had only issued notice to the Respondent on the said IA, directing them to appear before the learned NCLT and exchange their pleadings. The Appellant alleges that the grievance of the Appellant is that the said application ought to have been considered on the merits itself on the said date and according to the order sheet of the Learned NCLT, as reflected it is shown that the matter is now fixed on 08.04.2025.
Without venturing into the merits of the matter with regards to the propriety of CA No. 16/2025, since now the matter is scheduled to be taken up on 08.04.2025 before learned NCLT, we request the learned NCLT to consider the application of the Appellant, being CA No. 16/2025, on its merit and will endevour to decide the same within the stipulated time frame and if the pleadings are exchanged on the same date itself i.e., 08.04.2025. We hope that the learned NCLT will dispose of the CA, if not possible on 08.04.2025, then at least within one month from the said date.
Subject to the aforesaid the Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No.37/2025, stands ‘closed’.