AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Case taken up. Learned Counsel for both side are present.
Learned Counsel for Directors/JD/ Newly arrayed JD, requested for grant of some more time purely on humanitarian ground, for ensuring presence of Directors before this Tribunal, and this was on the ground of some ailment, health related issues, as well as financial scarcity.
The other argument advanced was Judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court, passed in CM (M) No. 1399/2019 and CM No. 42217/ 2019 (for Stay), G.S Sandhu and Anr. Vs. Geeta Aggarwal, wherein the proposition of law, that for executing a decree against a Company Director and their assets may not be proceeded, because Company being an entity, stands on a separate footing, than its Directors, and unless Directors were arrayed as party, in the proceeding, wherein decree was passed, they cannot be held personally liable in execution of that decree. The order, under which Directors were arrayed in this execution proceeding, was a subsequent Order, because Directors were not a party in the proceeding, wherein decree was passed. There are of no concern with present decree. By Order of this Tribunal, they have been arrayed as a party, and they will move appropriate application, by way of appropriate procedure, for deleting their name. Meanwhile, blanket direction for disclosing of their assets, owned in their personal capacity, may not survive.
Learned Counsel for decree holder vehemently opposed this argument, by saying that the order was passed by Tribunal, and it was not recalled as yet. The same is to be acted upon, and even after four years, the compliance is not being made of the decree. A direction was there for disclosing the assets of Company, but it was also not complied with and all these arguments, were heard at the time of passing of order dated 30.01.2024, wherein Directors were directed to be present in person, for mentioning their contention and disclosing of the property of JD Company. But they are not appearing. It is a deliberate one.
Having heard and gone through the material, and arguments, raised as above, it is apparent that strict adherence of CPC with regard to proceeding, before this specialised Tribunal, is not mandated in TRAI Act. The Principle of Natural Justice is to be adhered and in exercise of that Principle of Natural Justice, opportunity of hearing was given to Directors, for being present before this Tribunal, and saying whatever they want to say, before this Tribunal or to disclose the property of Company for proceeding with that property, and the same is not being availed by them.
But considering the request on the humanitarian ground, and the assurance given by Learned Counsel for JD, one opportunity is being given, for ensuring the presence of JD/ Directors as above, before this Tribunal on 03.04.2024 “for further hearing”.