Raju Rangadhamaiah Vs M. Jagadamba. (NCLAT Chennai)
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in Chennai has dismissed a recall application filed by Raju Rangadhamaiah, refusing to condone a 248-day delay. The application sought to recall an order from February 1, 2023, which had allowed the appellant to withdraw his company appeal.
The NCLAT noted that the original order was passed after a “prolonged hearing” and was, in fact, “solicited” by the appellant himself, who had requested to withdraw the appeal to pursue other legal remedies. The Tribunal stated that the order contained no error that would justify a recall, as it was a direct result of the appellant’s own request.
Regarding the delay of 248 days in filing the recall application, the appellant offered a single-line explanation: that he needed time to obtain certain documents. The NCLAT found this reason to be unsatisfactory. The court reasoned that since the appellant had been actively pursuing the original appeal in 2023, his claim of needing a considerable amount of time to collect documents for the recall application was not credible. Consequently, the NCLAT rejected both the application for condonation of delay and the recall application, holding that the grounds for both were unsustainable.
