Bombay High Court
Chaturvedi And Shah Llp vs National Financial Reporting ... on 15 September, 2021
Author: Prithviraj K. Chavan
Bench: K.K. Tated, Prithviraj K. Chavan
V.C. 3. WPL 18368-21odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 18368 OF 2021
Chaturvedi and Shah LLP ... Petitioner
Versus
National Financial Reporting Authority ... Respondent
.........
Mr. Siddharth Agarwal, Senior Counsel, Mr. Prafulla B. Shah, Mr. Rohan
Mahadik, Mrs Gunjan Shah and Ms. Stuti Gujral i/b The Juris Partners for
the Petitioner.
Mr. Anil Singh, Addl. S. G. a/w Mr. Aditya Thakkar, Mr. Ashish Mehta, Mr.
D. P. Singh, Ms. Sudiksha Gupta i/b Ethas Legal Alliance for the
Respondent.
.........
CORAM : K.K. TATED &
PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, JJ.
DATE :SEPTEMBER 15, 2021. P.C. :- . Heard.
2. By this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner is seeking directions against the Respondent to extend the time for submitting detail reply on Draft Audit Quality Review Report dated 12/05/2021 in the matter of Statutory Audit Report of Diwan Housing Finance Corporation Limited in the proceedings initiated under Section 132(2)(b) of the Companies Act 2013 read with Rules 7 and 8 of the NFRA Rules 2018. The Petitioner also claims other reliefs.
Laxmi 1 / 3 ::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2021 01:59:50 :::V.C. 3. WPL 18368-21odt
3. In the morning session, the learned senior counsel for the Petitioner submitted that they require atleast 10 to 12 weeks to file reply so that the Authority can decide the matter on its own merits. He further submits that they raised an issue about the jurisdiction before the Authority. He submits that the Authority by their e-mail dated 16/08/2021 (Exhibit-S, Page-1530) informed the Petitioner that the jurisdictional issue cannot be entertained because the same do not fall within the purview NFRA. Clause 6 of the said e-mail reads thus:
"(vi) Issues of the jurisdiction of the NFRA etc are all matters that do not fall within the purview of NFRA.
Moreover, The Audit firm is required to conduct the Audit as per the Auditing standards. It does not have the right of the forum as to who can inspect if the standards of Audit were followed or not. Furthermore, it is also an afterthought on part of the Audit firm to raise this issue after having shared the Audit file with NFRA and replied to NFRA all this while."
4. At that time, in the morning session, the learned ASG submitted that let the matter to be kept by 2.30 p.m., so that he can take instructions from the concerned officer. At 2.30 p.m. he submits that, the Authority will decide all issues including jurisdictional on its own merits after hearing the Petitioner. He further submits that, he received instructions from the concerned officer that they have no objection to extend the time for filing reply by the Petitioner by two weeks.
5. During the course of an argument, the learned ASG submitted that the present petition as it is filed by the Petitioner on the ground of territorial jurisdiction is not maintainable. An alternate efficacious remedy is available to the Petitioner. He submits that, if this Court Laxmi 2 / 3 ::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2021 01:59:50 ::: V.C. 3. WPL 18368-21odt granting some time to the Petitioner to file their reply and decide the matter on its own merits, all contentions of the parties may be kept open. Reply dated 26/08/2021 filed by the Respondent is taken on record.
6. The learned senior counsel for the Petitioner submits that he requires atleast 8 weeks time to file reply. He submits that the documentation in the present matter is more than thousand pages.
7. Considering the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the Petitioner and the statement made by the learned ASG, the following order is passed:
a. Liberty granted to the Petitioner to file their reply on or before 18/10/2021 with copy to other side.
b. The Authority to decide all the issues including the issues of jurisdiction without considering their e-mail dated 16/08/2021 on its own merits after hearing the Petitioner.
c. Liberty granted to the Petitioner to take an appropriate proceedings before the Authority for legal assistance.
d. All contentions of the parties are kept open.
e. The writ petition stands disposed of with these directions.
f. No order as to costs.
( PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.) ( K.K. TATED, J. )
Laxmi 3 / 3
::: Uploaded on - 16/09/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 17/09/2021 01:59:50 :::