Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, K. SURENDER, JJ
Maheshwaran S/o.K.R.E.Arumugham Ex-Managing Director M/s.Shree Vaishnodevi Mills Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
CA Mahalingam Suresh Kumar Liquidator of Shree Vaishno Devi Mills Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of parties and context of the case. (Para 1) |
| 2. petition filed under article 227 due to lack of appeal options. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. high court's limited jurisdiction in company appeal matters. (Para 4) |
| 4. need for nclat autonomy and caution against overreach by high court. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. importance of practical difficulties in judicial directions. (Para 7) |
| 6. responsibility of parties to request for expedient handling. (Para 8) |
| 7. civil revision petition dismissed without cost. (Para 9) |
[made by S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.,]
The Present Civil Revision Petition has been instituted under Article
227 of the Constitution of India seeking directions to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Chennai {hereinafter “NCLAT” for the sake of brevity} to expeditiously dispose of Company Appeal (AT)(CH) (INS)
No.443 of 2024 within a time frame and pass orders.
2. Mr.Nithyaesh Natraj, learned counsel representing Mr.Vaibhav Rangarajan Venkatesh, on behalf of the petitioner, would mainly contend that the present petition has been instituted under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, since no appeal would lie under Section 62 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016 {hereinaft
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
