2022 (6) TMI 1222 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Violation of principles of natural justice - Non-speaking order - grievance of the Appellant is that the Impugned order suffers from serious infirmity in the eye of law because of the fact that the said order is bereft and devoid of reasons, for want of material particulars in explaining necessary qualitative and quantitative reasons, for arriving at the just conclusion - HELD THAT - Considering the fact that the Impugned Order suffers from infirmity in the eye of law, therefore, it cannot stand a moment scrutiny in law, especially, for want of qualitative and quantitative reasons being ascribed thereto in the said Order and especially the said order is a cryptic and unreasoned one, which necessitates an inevitable conclusion to be arrived at, by this Tribunal, that the same is not valid in law. This Tribunal is inclined to interfere to the said Impugned order for substantial cause of justice. The Impugned Order dated 24.05.2022 in IA/320/CHE/2021 in CP/1156/IB/2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench-1, Chennai) in CP/1156/IB/2018 is hereby set aside - the matter is remitted back to the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench-1, Chennai) and the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench-1, Chennai) is directed to take up IA/320/CHE/2021 in CP/1156/IB/2018 for Hearing de novo and to dispose of the same, by passing a reasoned Speaking Order on merits, of course, after providing adequate opportunities to both the parties, in accordance with law. Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
- Lack of reasons in the impugned order dated 24.05.2022
- Incorrect mention of application number in the impugned order
- Adherence to principles of Natural Justice
- Validity of the impugned order
- Interference by the Appellate Tribunal
- Remittance of the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority

Analysis:
The judgment by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, involved several key issues. Firstly, it addressed the grievance raised by the Appellant regarding the lack of reasons in the impugned order dated 24.05.2022. The Appellant argued that the order was deficient in explaining qualitative and quantitative reasons for the conclusion reached, rendering it invalid in the eyes of the law. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of a reasoned order for fairness and adherence to principles of Natural Justice, highlighting the need for a just and fair process in legal proceedings.

Secondly, the judgment noted an error in the impugned order where the application number was incorrectly mentioned. This discrepancy was identified as a significant issue, leading to confusion and potential inaccuracies in the legal documentation. The Tribunal recognized the importance of accurate record-keeping and the need for precise references in legal orders to avoid any misunderstandings or misinterpretations.

Furthermore, the Tribunal deliberated on the validity of the impugned order and concluded that it suffered from an infirmity in the eye of the law due to its cryptic and unreasoned nature. As a result, the Tribunal decided to set aside the impugned order for substantial cause of justice, emphasizing the necessity of clear and well-reasoned legal decisions.

In response to the Appellant's concerns, the Tribunal decided to interfere with the impugned order and remit the matter back to the Adjudicating Authority for a fresh hearing. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to consider the case de novo, pass a reasoned speaking order on merits, and provide both parties with adequate opportunities in accordance with the law. The Tribunal stressed the importance of unbiased decision-making and instructed the Adjudicating Authority to issue final orders in a just and fair manner within a specified timeframe.

In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the significance of upholding legal principles, ensuring procedural fairness, and maintaining the integrity of legal proceedings. By addressing the issues raised by the parties and providing clear directions for further proceedings, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal sought to promote transparency, accountability, and justice in the resolution of the dispute at hand.