Interim status quo in oppression and mismanagement upheld where NCLT's just and equitable powers protected parties' substantive rights.

In proceedings for oppression and mismanagement, the NCLT may issue interim orders regulating the company's affairs on terms that are just and equitable. The tribunal upheld an order directing status quo for 14 days and preserving the secured creditor's rights thereafter, because the arrangement protected the parties without finally deciding whether the mortgaged property could be sold. The appellate forum found no basis to interfere, as the interim order did not prejudice substantive rights and fell within the NCLT's wide power under Section 242(4) of the Companies Act, 2013.

---

---

Issues: Whether the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal should interfere with the National Company Law Tribunal's interim order granting status quo for a limited period and permitting the secured creditor to proceed thereafter.

Analysis: The dispute arose in proceedings for oppression and mismanagement. The interim order protected the appellants by directing maintenance of status quo for 14 days and preserved the secured creditor's rights thereafter. The Tribunal held that, at the interim stage, it was unnecessary to decide whether the secured creditor could sell the mortgaged property, since that question would depend on the merits of the oppression and mismanagement allegations. It further held that the National Company Law Tribunal has wide power under Section 242(4) of the Companies Act, 2013 to pass interim orders regulating the company's affairs on terms that are just and equitable, and that the impugned order met that standard.

Conclusion: No interference was warranted with the interim order, and the challenge to it failed.

Final Conclusion: The appellate challenge to the interim arrangement was rejected, and the tribunal's discretionary protection of the parties' positions was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: In proceedings for oppression and mismanagement, the Tribunal may pass interim orders regulating the company's affairs if they are just and equitable, and an appellate forum will not interfere where the interim order does not prejudice the parties' substantive rights.

---