9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 270X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd even that has been decided. The Tribunal can rectify any mistake apparent from the record, if the mistake comes or is brought to its Notice by the parties within two years. The Sub-Section (2) has a proviso which puts an embargo on this power of NCLT by directing that no such amendment shall be made in respect of any Order against which Appeal has been preferred under this Act. Undisputedly, the appeal was filed. Even in the Appeal although the Appellant appeared as Respondent, the Appellant does not appear to have raised this grievance that the further or consequential relief was not granted. The Appellant did not file the Appeal on its own also, if she had grievances regarding part of relief not being granted. Admittedly, relief ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore Company Law Board which was disposed by Judgement and Order dated 14th March, 2017 (hereafter referred as Primary Order) by NCLT. The said Order referred to the prayers which had been made by the Appellant in the Company Petition in para 2 of its Judgement. Prayer - A and B related to direction to Respondents to allot or transfer such number of shares so as to entitle the Petitioner to maintain her percentage shareholding which she held at the time of deletion of her name as shareholder of the Company illegally in the year 1999. Prayer A and B of the petition which were reproduced, are as under:- ( a) Direct the Respondents to, either allot or transfer, such number of shares so as to entitle the Petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in period specified and direction to the Respondents to allot the shares accrued through three rights issues to the Petitioner and to rectify the members register. The third direction related to payment of costs. 3. The Appellant admittedly did not appeal against this Primary Order. The Respondents filed CA 95/2017 in National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT in short) which came to be disposed on 31st May, 2017. The Respondents had challenged the said Primary Order of NCLT on the ground of delay and this Tribunal heard the Respondent in that Appeal, i.e. the present Appellant with regard to that Appeal and dismissed the Appeal. 4. It appears that after the said Appeal was disposed by this Tribunal, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t pass Orders in the Primary Order regarding grant of dividends and interest on the dividends when NCLT passed orders that the Respondents are liable to allot the three rights issue shares to the Appellant. The learned Counsel submitted that the Appellant in fact also sent another letter dated 23.08.2018 (Page 154) to the Respondents offering to pay interest on the money of the shares so that the Respondents could issue the dividends to her but the same was not accepted by the Respondents. It is argued that the NCLT erred in rejecting the IA for rectification which occurred due to omission. 7. Against this, the learned Counsel for the Respondents is raising various grievances which relate to what occurred during the penden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the record, amend any order passed by it, and shall make such amendment, if the mistake is brought to the notice by the parties. Provided that no such amendment shall be made in respect of any order against which an appeal has been preferred under this Act. ( 3) The Tribunal shall send a copy of every order passed under this section to all the parties concerned. It is apparent from above that the Tribunal can rectify any mistake apparent from the record, if the mistake comes or is brought to its Notice by the parties within two years. The Sub-Section (2) as can be seen above, has a proviso which puts an embargo on this power of NCLT by directing that no such amendment shall b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
