AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
(Hybrid Mode)
Heard Counsel for the appellant and Ld. Counsel for the respondent herein.
This appeal has been filed against the order passed by National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench-IV dated 09.03.2026 in contempt petition No. 30 of 2025. Adjudicating Authority has issued direction in paragraph- 20 of the order to the following effect:-
“20.We hold that Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 have wilfully disobeyed the order dated 11.06.2025 passed by this Adjudicating Authority and are thus liable to be proceeded against for contempt. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as well as the apparent act of perjury committed by the contemnors. The Contemnors are directed to purge the contempt by complying with the order dated 11.06.2025 within one week, failing which appropriate action will be taken against them.”
Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that Adjudicating Authority in the impugned order has observed that despite final opportunity dated 25.08.2025. The respondent had failed to file the reply and the right of respondent to file reply was closed. It is submitted that the said observation is not recording to the record. Appellant after their right to file reply was closed has filed an IA- 4970/2025 which was disposed of permitting the reply filed by the appellant be taken on record. It is submitted that the Adjudicating Authority has not adverted to the reply which was filed by the appellant and order impugned was passed without consideration of reply and on the wrong footing that the right of the reply has been closed. Ld. Counsel for the RP does not dispute that reply was filed by the appellant was taken on record but there is no consideration of the reply in the impugned order.
We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the records.
In paragraph-4 of the order following has been observed:-
“4.On 25.08.2025, this Adjudicating Authority directed compliance with the order dated 13.08.2025 and granted a final opportunity to the Respondents to the file their reply within three days. Thereafter, on 15.09.2025, it was recorded that despite directions dated 13.08.2025 granting one week’s time and the final opportunity dated 25.08.2025 granting three day’s time, the Respondents had failed to file their reply. Accordingly, the right of the Respondents to file reply was closed.”
On 10.10.2025 that is subsequent to 15.09.2025 in IA No. 4970/2025 following order was passed by Adjudicating Authority:-
“ORDER IA-4970/2025 Ms. Pooja M. Sehgal, Ld. Sr. Counsel for the Petitioner is present physically whereas Ld. Counsel for the RP is present through video conferencing. Ld. Counsel for the RP submits that they have received the copy of the reply filed in Contempt Petition along with the present application and they have no objection if the reply is taken on record only to the extent to permit the applicant to put the brief note. Considering the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of both the parties, this Tribunal is inclined to partly allow the present application. Reply is taken on record along with IA. Applicant/Contemnor is directed to file a brief note with regard to Contempt Application within three days with an advance copy to the other side. Accordingly, IA-4970/2025 is partly allowed and stands disposed of.”
The above order clearly indicate that reply filed by the appellant was taken on record and parties were also permitted to file brief note with regard to contempt application. The observation made in paragraph-4 that right to file reply has been closed obviously is incorrect. Adjudicating Authority has not taken into consideration subsequent order 10.10.2025 by which reply was taken on record. In view of the above, order impugned cannot be sustained and we set aside on the above ground alone. The contempt petition no. 30/2025 is revived before the Adjudicating Authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
With the above observations, appeal is disposed of.