Finality of concluded company orders bars recall absent express review power, even where fraud is alleged.

A concluded company petition order that had already attained finality, including before the Supreme Court, could not be reopened by recall in the absence of an express statutory power of review or recall. The Tribunal treated the application as an attempt to reagitate issues already finally decided and held that allegations of fraud or suppression did not, on this record, justify interference with the earlier final order. The recall request was therefore held not maintainable, and the refusal to reopen the matter was sustained, leaving the earlier order undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the recall application seeking to set aside the earlier company petition order, after the order had attained finality up to the Supreme Court, was maintainable and warranted interference on the ground of alleged fraud and suppression of facts.

Analysis: The appeal challenged the refusal to recall an earlier order that had already been carried in appeal and had attained finality. The Tribunal held that the impugned order was not open to recall in the absence of any express statutory power of review or recall, and that the applicant was attempting to reagitate matters already concluded. Allegations of fraud did not persuade the Tribunal to reopen the concluded proceedings in the face of final adjudication and the rejection of the recall request by the NCLT.

Conclusion: The recall application was not maintainable, and no interference with the impugned order was called for. The appeal failed and the order rejecting recall was sustained.

Final Conclusion: The proceedings ended with affirmation of the NCLT's refusal to reopen the concluded matter, leaving the earlier order undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: A concluded order that has attained finality cannot be reopened by way of recall in the absence of an express power of review or recall, even if fraud is alleged, unless the law specifically authorises such reopening.

---