PNB Housing Finance Ltd. vs Hubtown Ltd. & Ors.

10.04.2023: By the last order, considering the fact that in both the appeals same and similar order was assailed, we proposed to hear both the appeals together.

Heard Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Ld. Counsel assisted by Mr. Yogesh C., Ld. Counsel for the Appellant and Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Ld. Sr. Counsel, Mr. Prateek Seksaria, Ld. Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. Nirav Shah, Ld. Counsel for Respondent No.1 and other Counsels who have appeared on behalf of respective Respondents.

The present appeal has been preferred by the Appellant against an interim order dated 14.03.2023 passed by Ld. National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Mumbai in CP/85(MB)/2023. By the said order Ld. NCLT, while deferring hearing to the next date i.e. 26.04.2023, directed the parties to maintain status quo to the extent of resolutions passed in the alleged gathering held on 09.03.2023. The order categorically states that said status quo order was till the next date of hearing. The Respondents before the NCLT were also directed to file their reply to the Company Petition. The Appellant has alleged that despite the fact that appellant was the necessary party, without impleading him, ex-parte interim order has been passed and as such it is necessary to pass an order for staying the impugned order. We are of the opinion that if the appellant was not party before the NCLT in no event the appellant is entitled to approach this Tribunal.

After some argument Mr. Mitra, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant requested for disposal of the present appeal so that he may approach the NCLT and request for impleading him as party. He submits that he may also be allowed to file petition on the question of maintainability. Without recording any opinion we dispose of this appeal granting liberty to the appellant to approach the NCLT. If such application is filed we expect that Ld. NCLT may hear the parties and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. If possible on the point of status quo order also on the next date itself, the NCLT may consider to pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

The Appeal stands disposed of with above observations.

So far as CA (AT) No. 43 of 2023 is concerned on going through the impugned order it is evident that Ld. NCLT while passing status quo order only till next date i.e. 26.04.2023 directed the parties to file reply. In such situation if the appellant is in a position to satisfy the NCLT that neither a status quo order was required nor main petition was maintainable, he may file appropriate response. NCLT itself has granted liberty to file reply. He may file reply before the NCLT and we expect that NCLT may examine the same and pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

With above observations this appeal too stands disposed of.