AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Appellant is an applicant to the proceedings under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, having been initiated before the Ld. NCLT, Ahmedabad and the same is presently pending consideration.
During the course of the proceedings under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, the Ld. Tribunal vide its order dated 30.07.2026, had passed an order having two implications:
(i). A direction was issued for appointment of a mediator in order to make an effort for settlement of the dispute between the parties, by way of mediation.
(ii). In pursuance thereof, a direction was also issued to appoint a mediator from the mediation panel of mediators of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and to complete the mediation process within the time period as prescribed therein.
This part is not in dispute and the Appellant has candidly stated that he is still open to participate in the mediation process, so as to amicably settle the dispute. The grievance of the Appellant is that, being the subsequent part of the direction, which has appointed a valuer for the purposes of a valuation of the assets, may not be required to be done at the stage when the issue is yet to be considered by the mediator who has to take the proceedings on his own, particularly when the order in itself contains a rider that the report, which is required to be placed by the valuer in relation to the assets has been directed to be kept in the sealed cover.
Quite obviously, the intention of the Tribunal while passing the order for appointment of the valuer for assessing the valuation of the assets, which has been directed to kept in a sealed cover, was that it is not a document, which was intended to be required to be utilized for the purposes of determination of mediation, which was to be considered independently, uninfluenced by the valuation report. The placement of the valuation report would have been for future which may ultimately be required to be considered if the mediation results in a failure and the Company Petition is required to be taken up on the merits.
In these circumstances, particularly when the valuation report has been directed to be kept in a sealed cover, let the valuation process be completed as directed by the order. The report, as directed to be submitted, by the valuer would be continued to be kept in a sealed cover till the mediation process itself is concluded. In future, if at all the valuation report is required to be considered or utilized on its merits having a bearing of the main proceedings of the Company Petition. The parties to the Company Petition would be given an ample of opportunity to raise their objections, if so desired, to the valuation report. Subject to the above, because at this stage, the order of the valuation report in a sealed cover is not prejudicial to the proceedings of either the Company Petition or to the mediation, we dispose of the present Company Appeal with the following directions:
The valuation may be proceeded with, as directed.
The report of the mediator would be kept in a sealed cover, till mediation proceedings are independently divided.
The valuation report will not be utilized for the purposes of mediation process.
The valuer’s report, in case if it is required, would only be considered while taking a decision on the Company Petition, only after the mediation proceedings are concluded has failed and when the Company Petition is required to be considered on its merits.
Subject to the aforesaid conditions, this Company Appeal stands closed. The valuation report, if at all required, would be considered after adherence of principals of natural justice, when the Company Petition itself is taken up on merits.