S. R. KRISHNA KUMAR
Byju Raveendran – Appellant
Versus
Think And Learn Private Limited – Respondent
ORDER
S.R. Krishna Kumar, J. -
Both these petitions arise out of the impugned order dated 12.06.2024 passed on C.A.No.71/2024 in C.P.No.18/BB/2024 on the file of the National Company Law Tribunal, Special Bench, Bengaluru (for short 'the NCLT'). The said company petition was filed by the respondents 1 to 5 under Sections 241-242 of the Companies Act, 2013 (for short 'the said Act of 2013').
2. The petitioners in W.P.No.15788/2024 are arrayed as respondents 2 to 4 in the said company petition, while the petitioner in W.P.No.15801/2024 is arrayed as respondent No.1 in the said company petition, which is pending adjudication before the NCLT.
3. During the pendency of the said proceedings before the NCLT, the respondents 1 to 5 filed an application C.A.No.71/2024 under Section 242(4) of the said Act of 2013 r/w Rules 11 and 32 of the NCLT Rules, 2016. The said application having been opposed by the petitioners herein, who filed their statement of objections, the NCLT proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 12.06.2024 allowing the said application C.A.No.71/2024 in favour of respondents 1 to 5, thereby granting injunction in their favour against the petitioners till disposal of the mai
All Begal Excise LicenSees' Association vs. Raghavendra Singh and others - 2007(11) SCC 374;
Central Board of Trustees v. Indore Composite (P) Ltd.
Chhaganbhai Norsinbhai vs. Soni Chandubhai Gordhanbhai and others - (1976) 2 SCC 951;
Delhi Development Authority vs. Skipper Construction Co.(P) Ltd.
K.A.Ansari and another vs. Indian Airlines Limited - (2009) 2 SCC 164;
Nagindas Ramdas vs. Dalpatram Ichhram @ Brijram and others - (1974) 1 SCC 242;
Noorali Babul Thanewala vs. K.M.M.Shetty and others - (1990)1 SCC 259;
Prem Narain vs. Vishnu Exchange Charitable Trust and others - (1984) 4 SCC 375;
Rekha Mukherjee vs. Ashis Kumar Das and others - (2005) 3 SCC 427;
Ritesh Tewari and another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others - (2010) 10 SCC 677;
Sonu vs.Sonu Yadav & Another - (2021) 15 SCC 228;
Surjit Singh and others vs. Harbans Singh and others - (1995) 6 SCC 50;
Union Public Service Commission vs. Bibhu Prasad Sarangi - (2021) 4 SCC 516
Judicial orders, particularly those granting injunctions, must be reasoned and demonstrate the application of legal standards to the facts; failure to do so violates principles of natural justice.
The court reiterated that interim orders protecting rights pending final adjudication are crucial, and only appealable orders determining rights of parties fall under the Companies Act, 2013.
A writ petition pursuing parallel remedies under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is impermissible and affects parties' rights; interim orders must determine substantial issues.
Judicial immunity under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985 is upheld, but the court emphasizes the need for accountability and the exhaustion of alternative remedies before seeking writ relief.
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.