Jiostar India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Absolute Legends Sports Pvt. Ltd. (NCLAT Delhi)
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi, has issued notice in an appeal filed by Jiostar India Pvt. Ltd. challenging an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). The Appellate Tribunal took note of the appellant’s contention that a material agreement executed on behalf of Jiostar had not been considered by the NCLT while passing the impugned order.
Appellant’s Contentions
Appearing before the NCLAT, counsel for Jiostar India Pvt. Ltd. drew the Tribunal’s attention to an agreement which, according to the appellant, had been duly signed by Mr. Ankush Mahajan on behalf of Jiostar.
It was argued that the existence and execution of this agreement constituted an important aspect of the dispute. However, the appellant contended that the NCLT had failed to consider this agreement while deciding the matter. According to the appellant, such non-consideration resulted in the impugned order being passed without appreciating the factual foundation of the case in its proper perspective.
The appellant therefore sought interference by the Appellate Tribunal, contending that the basis of the impugned order stood vitiated due to the omission to examine the relevant agreement.
NCLAT’s Observations
After hearing the submissions made on behalf of the appellant and perusing the record placed before it, the NCLAT found it appropriate to issue notice to the sole respondent.
At this preliminary stage, the Appellate Tribunal did not express any opinion on the merits of the controversy. Instead, it considered it appropriate to seek the respondent’s response before proceeding further with the matter.
Directions Issued
The NCLAT directed the appellant to take necessary steps for service of notice upon the sole respondent within five days through all available modes, including:
- Speed Post;
- E-mail; and
- Hand delivery.
The Tribunal further directed the appellant to file an affidavit of service on or before the next date of hearing to establish compliance with the service directions.
Next Date of Hearing
The matter has been directed to be listed before the NCLAT on 31 July 2026 for further proceedings after completion of service upon the respondent.
Conclusion
The NCLAT’s order is an interim procedural order. The Tribunal has not adjudicated the merits of the dispute but has taken cognizance of the appellant’s contention that an agreement allegedly signed on behalf of Jiostar was not considered by the NCLT. The appeal will now proceed after the respondent is served and afforded an opportunity to present its case.
FULL TEXT OF THE NCLAT JUDGMENT/ORDER
Heard Learned Counsel for the perused the record.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant has taken us to the agreement and submits that this agreement was duly singed by Mr. Ankush Mahajan on behalf of Jiostar. However, this aspect has not been considered by the Learned Tribunal and therefore, the very basis of the impugned order is not perceived by the Learned Tribunal in right perspective.
Having heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant, let notice be issued to the Sole Respondent. Steps along with requisites be taken within five days by all means i.e., through speed post, e-mail as well as by hand.
Needless to say that the Appellant would also file an affidavit of service on or before the next date of listing.
List this matter on 31.07.2026.
