Appeal on Share Transfer Dispute Resolved: Order Highlights Violation

The appeal involved a delay in re-filing, examination of an impugned order, resolution of a dispute regarding transferred shares, and the appellant's grievance against an adverse order. The delay in re-filing was condoned. The Tribunal decided not to delve into the merits of the case and disposed of the appeal without notice to other respondents. The order highlighted the transfer of shares in violation of a previous order. The appellant was advised to file an application before the NCLT for recall of the order. The appeal was disposed of, granting liberty to the appellant to file the necessary application before the NCLT.

---

---

Issues Involved:
The appeal involved a delay in re-filing, examination of an impugned order, resolution of a dispute regarding transferred shares, and the appellant's grievance against an adverse order passed without being impleaded as a party in the main petition.

Delay in Re-filing:
The appeal was filed within time, but a delay of 44 days in re-filing occurred. An interlocutory application was filed to condone the delay, citing reasons beyond the appellant's control. The delay was condoned after considering the submissions of the appellant's counsel and the facts stated in the application.

Examination of Impugned Order:
The Tribunal decided not to delve into the merits of the case after examining the impugned order. Without issuing notice to other respondents, the appeal was disposed of.

Resolution of Dispute Regarding Transferred Shares:
The appeal was filed against an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal regarding the transfer of shares. The order highlighted the transfer of shares in violation of a previous order and directed that no further steps be taken regarding the transferred shares. The appellant, represented by counsel, was aggrieved by this direction and argued that the status quo order was only applicable to the company's properties in Chennai, not the shares.

Grievance Against Adverse Order:
The appellant contended that they were not made a party before the NCLT and an adverse order was passed against them. The Tribunal suggested that the appellant should have filed an application before the NCLT for recall of the order and to be impleaded as a respondent in the main petition. The appeal was disposed of, granting liberty to the appellant to file the appropriate application before the NCLT, expecting a prompt decision from the NCLT after hearing all parties.

Final Disposition:
The Tribunal made it clear that its observations should not influence the NCLT's decision and granted liberty for the appellant to file the necessary application. The appeal was disposed of with these observations, leaving the NCLT free to examine other interlocutory applications as well.

---