Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 7]

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

M/S Spartek Ceramics India Ltd. vs Union Of India on 25 October, 2018

Bench: Rohinton Fali Nariman, Navin Sinha

                                                              1

                                           IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                            CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                      CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 7291­7292 OF 2018
                              
                       
     M/S SPARTEK CERAMICS INDIA LTD.                    ...  Appellant(s)
      
                           Versus

       UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                                               
                                                                                      ... Respondent(s)

                                                        WITH
                                             CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8247/2018

                                        CIVIL APPEAL NO.     OF 2018
                                            (D. NO. 33241/2018)

                                                     O R D E R 


     1)                  Delay condoned.

     2)                  Having heard learned counsel in all the three appeals

     before us for some time, and having gone through the judgment

     dated                28.05.2018    passed     by   the       the    National    Company      Law

     Appellate                  Tribunal     (NCLAT),   we    are       of   the   view    that   the

     judgment of the NCLAT holding that the appeal filed by the

     Central Government in that case not maintainable in view of

     the                 fact   that   the    Notification        dated      24.05.2017      travels

     beyond the scope of the removal of difficulties provision is

     correct. We are of the view that, having held that the appeal

     is not maintainable, the appellate Tribunal should not have
Signature Not Verified
     adjudicated upon either the limitation aspect of the case or
Digitally signed by R
NATARAJAN
Date: 2018.11.01
10:10:35 IST
     the merits of the particular Scheme before it.
Reason:
                                                                                          Therefore,

     while upholding the judgment passed by the appellate Tribunal
                                            2

on the ground that the appeal itself was not maintainable, we

set aside the judgment insofar as it purports to deal with

the limitation aspect of the case and the merits including

the declaration of the Scheme as being illegal.

3)     Insofar   as    Civil    Appeal    No.     8247   of    2018    and      Civil

Appeal D. No. 33241/2018 are concerned, it is clear that on

the facts in these cases, originally, the appellants had

approached the High Court of Delhi in writ petitions.                             The

High    Court    of    Delhi,     by    judgment    dated      22.02.2018         (as

modified    by        order     dated    17.04.2018)          and     14.09.2017,

respectively, ordered the parties to avail of the alternative

remedy of filing an appeal before the NCLAT in view of the

Notification      dated       24.05.2017        which    was    done       by     the

appellants in these appeals.

4)     As the impugned judgment dated 28.05.2018 has set aside

this   Notification,      and    which    has     been   upheld       by   us,    the

NCLAT, in both these cases, has dismissed the two appeals so

filed, following the main judgment of 28.05.2018.                      This being

the case, we revive the two writ petitions that had been

before the High Court of Delhi in both the appeals before us

with liberty to the appellants to amend the aforesaid writ

petitions within a period of four weeks from today.

5)     We request the High Court of Delhi to take up the writ

petitions at the earliest.              It is made clear that pleadings

may be completed in both the writ petitions expeditiously,

and all points available in fact and law to all parties shall

be kept open.
                                 3



6)   With these observations, the appeals are disposed of.

7)   Pending applications shall stand disposed of.



                                         
                                     …….......................J.
                                      (ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN)



                                    ….........................J.
                                      (NAVIN SINHA)
 
         
New Delhi,
Dated: October 25, 2018.            
                                   4

ITEM NO.13               COURT NO.8                 SECTION XVII

               S U P R E M E C O U R T O F      I N D I A
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

                Civil Appeal   No(s).   7291-7292/2018

M/S SPARTEK CERAMICS INDIA LTD.                       Appellant(s)

                                  VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                 Respondent(s)

(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.104554/2018-STAY APPLICATION)

WITH
C.A. No. 8247/2018 (XVII)
(IA No.114442/2018-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT)

Diary No(s). 33241/2018 (XVII)
(FOR ADMISSION and IA No.136889/2018-CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING
APPEAL)

Date : 25-10-2018 These appeals were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN
          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA

For Parties:        Mr. P.S. Narsimha, ASG
                    Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv.
                    Ms. Niranjana Singh, Adv.
                    Mr. Rohit Rao, Adv.
                    Mrs. Anil Katiyar, AOR

                    Mr. Akshat Kumar, AOR

                    Mr. Amar Dave, Adv.
                    Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Adv.
                    Mr. Rajeev Shankar Bhatnagar, Adv.
                    Mr. Ratnil Chauhan, Adv.
                    Ms. Meherunnisa Anand, Adv.
                    M/s. Khaitan & Co., AOR

                    Mr. Pulkit Deora, Adv.
                    Ms. Sneha Bharti, Adv.
                    Ms. Mayuri Raghuvanshi, AOR

                    Mr. Shyam Divan, Sr. Adv.
                    Mr. Akshat Kumar, AOR
                    Mr. Ajay K. Jain, Adv.
                                  5

                   Mr.   Atanu Mukherjee, Adv.
                   Mr.   Yash Karan Jain, Adv.
                   Mr.   Neeraj Chaudhary, Adv.
                   Mr.   K.K.R. Das, Adv.

                   Ms. Mayuri Raghuvanshi, AOR

                   Mr. Sachin Sharma, Adv.
                   Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR

                   Mr. Deepak Biswas, Adv.
                   Ms. Sanya Dua, Adv.
                   Ms. Anannya Ghosh, AOR




          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                             O R D E R

Delay condoned.

The civil appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed order.

Pending applications shall stand disposed of.

(MANAV SHARMA) (TAPAN KUMAR CHAKRABORTY) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER (Signed order is placed on the file.)