TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Disputed orders in abeyance until appeal hearing. Liberty granted to seek NCLAT orders. Decision based on hearing date.</h1> <h3>M. BASKARAN Versus NATIONAL FINANCIAL REPORTING AUTHORITY (NFRA) And SAM VARGHESE Versus NATIONAL FINANCIAL REPORTING AUTHORITY (NFRA)</h3> M. BASKARAN Versus NATIONAL FINANCIAL REPORTING AUTHORITY (NFRA) And SAM VARGHESE Versus NATIONAL FINANCIAL REPORTING AUTHORITY (NFRA) - TMI Issues involved: The main issue in these writ petitions is the suspension of the operation of Exhibit P7 until 03.07.2023, the date on which Exhibit P2 appeal is scheduled for consideration by the NCLAT after the summer vacation.Comprehensive details of the judgment for each issue involved:1. Suspension of Exhibit P7: The petitioners sought the suspension of the operation of Exhibit P7 until 03.07.2023 when the NCLAT is set to consider Exhibit P2 appeal. The petitioners were debarred as per Exhibit P1 by the NFRA, and they challenged this by filing the appeal and stay petition before the NCLAT. The Tribunal's order, Ext.P5, scheduled the application and appeal for hearing on 03.07.2023 after the summer vacation. However, subsequent orders, Exts.P6 and P7, were issued, leading to the petitioners' grievance that these should not have been issued while the stay petition is pending. After considering the contentions, the court noted that the case is already scheduled for 03.07.2023, and therefore, Exts.P6 and P7 can be kept in abeyance until that date for the Tribunal to make appropriate decisions.2. Court's Decision: The court observed that since the appeal and petitions are already posted for 03.07.2023, it is appropriate to keep Exts.P6 and P7 in abeyance until that date. The petitioners are also given the liberty to approach the NCLAT in the meantime for any necessary orders. The court clarified that its decision does not delve into the merits of the case but is based on the scheduled hearing date of the appeal and petitions at the NCLAT.This judgment primarily focused on the suspension of certain orders until the scheduled date for the appeal's consideration by the NCLAT, ensuring that the appropriate legal process is followed and allowing the petitioners the opportunity to seek further relief from the Tribunal.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
