Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2023) 08 NCLAT CK 0066

Rachna Tandon & Ors vs Kalory Foods Pvt. Ltd. & Ors

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 21 August 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rakesh Kumar, Member (J) · Dr. Alok Srivastava, Member (T)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Company Appeal (AT) No. 147 Of 2023 & I.A. No. 3793 Of 2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 404 words

In the appeal an innocuous order has been assailed. By the said order i.e. order dated 12.07.2023, passed on I.A. No. 43/2022 and 16/2023 in CP No. 68/ALD/2022 Ld. National Company Law Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Prayagraj (herein after referred to as NCLT) had simply adjourned the matter due to paucity of time. Had it been a case of only adjournment at first instance we would have simply not entertained the appeal but fact remains that the appellant in the year 2022 had also approached this Tribunal. This Tribunal by order dated 22.11.2022 permitted Ld. Counsel for the Appellant to withdraw the appeal, with observation that Ld. NCLT may take appropriate decision in the matter in accordance with law. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits that despite observation of this Tribunal in its order dated 22.11.2022 no effective hearing has taken place either on interim prayer or on main petition. He submits that only on the ground of paucity of time the hearing in the matter is being deferred. He submits that pleadings in the main petition is already complete.

Heard Mr. Shadan Farasat, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant as well as Mr. Rajnish Sinha, Ld. Counsel who has appeared on advance notice on behalf of all the Respondents. Ld. Counsel for the Respondents also submitted that due to paucity of time hearing on the main petition was deferred on number of dates.

However, he agreed for early disposal of the main case by the NCLT. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant also raises no objection, if the appeal is disposed of with an observation for early disposal of the main petition. Ld. Counsel for both the  parties  submitted  that  pleading  in  main  petition  before  the  NCLT  is complete.

With the consent of both the parties we propose to dispose of this appeal with an observation that Ld. NCLT may take appropriate step so that the main petition may be heard and disposed of at the earliest. Since pleading is complete the main petition be disposed of as early as possible preferably within a period of one month from the date of commencement of hearing.

On receipt of a copy of this order Ld. NCLT is requested to fix an early date of hearing and keep the main petition i.e. C.P. No. 68/ALD/2022 on top of the board and take up the hearing on day to day basis.

With above observation the appeal stands disposed of.