Case Law Details
Suniel Dhandhania & Anr Vs Vichitra Narayan Pathak (NCLAT Delhi)
Introduction: The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in Delhi has passed a significant ruling concerning the Suniel Dhandhania & Anr Vs Vichitra Narayan Pathak case. The crux of this ruling focuses on the validity of email as a form of notice as per the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Rules.
Analysis: The Appellants, who are members of the Suspended Board of Directors of Golden Tobacco Ltd., approached the NCLAT after an order from the Adjudicating Authority directed them to submit necessary documents to the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The underlying contention of the appellants was the absence of any notice served to them for the application filed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Counsel for the Appellant emphasized on Rule 37, 38 & 105 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 which dictate the protocols for serving notices. It was contended that the only form of communication received was a computer-generated email dated 22.11.2022. This, according to them, does not fit the definition of a “notice” as per the stipulated rules.
Rule 49 specifically addresses scenarios where a party is subjected to an ex-parte hearing and grants them the right to request a reconsideration provided they demonstrate that no due notice was served. The NCLAT acknowledged this and opined that an application could be filed by the Appellant for recalling the initial order.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
