w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n

Nagesh Hosiery Exports (P) Ltd. & Others v/s Nagesh Kumar & Others

Company & Directors' Information:- J G HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101TZ2001PTC009707

Company & Directors' Information:- K D S HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101PB2001FTC024327

Company & Directors' Information:- R M H HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17125DL2007PTC167271

Company & Directors' Information:- P T M HOSIERY PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U52322WB1994PTC062394

Company & Directors' Information:- M G HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U17124TZ2002PTC010195

Company & Directors' Information:- NAGESH HOSIERY EXPORTS LTD [Active] CIN = U52322DL1980PLC010978

Company & Directors' Information:- D D HOSIERY PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U18101WB1973PTC028694

Company & Directors' Information:- M. B. HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101WB2008PTC125110

Company & Directors' Information:- R R HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18101MH1984PTC034394

Company & Directors' Information:- K K HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U18204MH2014PTC251777

Company & Directors' Information:- B B HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U74999MH2015PTC267158

Company & Directors' Information:- KUMAR HOSIERY PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U18101GJ1995PTC025277

Company & Directors' Information:- M C S HOSIERY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51311WB2001PTC093781

Company & Directors' Information:- KUMAR EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51900MH1968PTC014099

Company & Directors' Information:- S P HOSIERY PVT LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U51311PB1985PTC006113

    Company Appeals (At) No. 123 of 2017

    Decided On, 20 April 2017

    At, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal


    For the Petitioners: None. For the Respondents: Renu Mehra, in person.

Judgment Text

This is a defective and incomplete appeal preferred by Nagesh Hosiery Exports (P) Ltd and others and one Mr. Ravinder Kumar Mehra. It was filed on 3 March, 2017, with defects. Though more than six weeks had passed, defects were not removed.

2. In this appeal, Vakalatnama, affidavit, copy of the impugned order have not been filed and no court fee has yet been deposited. Therefore, the appeal was not to be registered.

3. However, it has been listed in view of a letter dated 18 April, 2017, received from the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal) wherein a copy of order dated 21 March, 2017 has been enclosed, which reads as follows:

"Learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for respondent No. 2 are present. Learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant represents that an application has been filed for execution of tire order dated 20.1.2017 as well as for contempt committed of the said order of this Tribunal. Counsel for the respondent No. 2 represents that an appeal has been filed against the order dated 20.1.2017. Since judicial proprietary demands that when the Hon'ble NCLAT is seized for the appeal it will not be appropriate for this Tribunal to proceed with matter. Further, in view of contempt jurisdiction having been also involved in relation to the order passed on 20.1.2017 by the Hon'ble Member, Mrs. Ina Malhotra, circumstances necessitate that the same be placed before the Hon'ble President for necessary directions to place the matter appropriately for consideration."

4. Letter dated 18 April, 2017, received from the Tribunal is quoted as below:

"I am directed to enclose herewith the copy of the order dated 21.3.2017 in the matter of Nagesh Hosiery Exports (P) Ltd. and others in Company Petition No. 97(ND) of 2006 and to request to intimate whether any appeal is pending in the subject matter before the Hon'ble NCLAT. Kindly accord priority."

5. In was in this background, the registry registered the appeal for orders.

6. From the record, we find that tire company petition was filed in the year 2006 by respondents, Mr. Nagesh Kumar and Mrs. Renu Mehra. The appellants are respondents therein. For one or other reason, the appellants are buying time and matter is pending for eleven years.

7. Under Section 422 of the Companies Act, 2013, the petitions were required to be disposed of within three months. However, more than ten months have passed after constitution of the Tribunal but it has not been disposed of in view of time taken by the appellants that too in the manner as noticed above. We find that just to delay the company petition, the appellants have played a dubious role in preferring the defective appeal, without enclosing Vakalatnama, without enclosing the copy of the impugned order and without affidavit and asking for time from the Tribunal on the ground that they have preferred the appeal and same is pending. In the circumstances, we direct tire Tribunal to dispose of the company petition preferably within one month without granting unnecessary adjournment to the parties. The appellants

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

who are respondents before the Tribunal should not be granted time on any ground. 8. It would be also open to the Tribunal to decide as to what action is to be taken against the respondents. The appeal is dismissed with aforesaid observation. 9. Let a copy of this order be forwarded to National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi.