9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 87 - HC - Insolvency and BankruptcyNCLAT proceedings - Requirements from the parties before the NCLAT to file brief written submissions and copies of the judgments - jurisdiction of the NCLAT to issue such direction - primordial ground raised by the Appellant is that there is no Rule or procedure which permits the NCLAT to direct filing of written submissions / judgments and exchanging copies thereof, between the parties - HELD THAT - Appellant may be right in his submission that there is no written procedure which provides for filing of written submissions or exchanging copies thereof between the parties, but that, in our view, cannot lead to a conclusion that the impugned orders of the NCLAT are illegal. As rightly held by the learned Single Judge, Courts or Tribunals usually direct filing of the brief written submissions in order to facilitate the adjudication and crystallize the issues involved in the matter before them. The questions of law and facts are placed before the Courts in a concise manner, which certainly streamline the course of proceedings, and exchanging the copies of the written submissions enables each side to meet the case of the other side more effectively at the time of final hearing. Direction to exchange the written submissions between the parties - HELD THAT - It is a matter of practice in all Courts and Tribunals as also a facet of principles of natural justice that when any party to a lis files any pleading/affidavit/document before a Court or a Tribunal, a copy is required to be given to the other side, as no document etc. can be relied upon by the Court without giving an opportunity to the other side to effectively deal with the said document - In the present case, Appellant has filed his written submissions before the NCLAT on 02.11.2020. Therefore, even assuming that there was no categorical direction by the NCLAT to supply a copy to the Respondent, it was incumbent upon the Appellant to share a copy with the Respondent, to enable the Respondent to defend its case and rebut the issues highlighted by the Appellant in the written submissions. It would be a travesty of justice if the NCLAT takes into account the written submissions of one party without a copy having been shared / exchanged with the other party. There are no merits in the appeal - appeal dismissed.
Issues:
1. Exemption from filing notarized affidavits. 2. Legality of directions issued by NCLAT to file written submissions and judgments. Exemption from filing notarized affidavits: The High Court allowed an application for exemption from filing notarized affidavits due to the prevailing situation, directing the applicant to file duly signed and affirmed affidavits within a week of the Court's regular functioning resuming. Legality of directions issued by NCLAT to file written submissions and judgments: The Appellant challenged the NCLAT's directions to file written submissions and judgments, contending that the NCLAT lacked the power to regulate its procedure in such a manner. The Appellant argued that the directions exceeded the NCLAT's jurisdiction as it does not have the authority to issue such directives, unlike the NCLT. The Appellant highlighted that neither the Companies Act, 2013, nor the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, provided for a procedure mandating the filing of written submissions and judgments. The High Court noted that while there was no specific written procedure for such filings, the directions were not illegal as they aimed to facilitate adjudication and streamline proceedings. The Court emphasized that exchanging copies of written submissions is a common practice in Courts and Tribunals to ensure fairness and effective presentation of cases. The High Court found no merit in the Appellant's argument against exchanging written submissions, stating that it is a fundamental aspect of natural justice to provide the other party with relevant documents to enable a fair defense. The Court upheld the decision of the Learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition and affirming the legality of the NCLAT's directions. The appeal was dismissed, emphasizing the importance of sharing written submissions to maintain fairness and uphold principles of natural justice in legal proceedings.
|
