Supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 should not bypass statutory remedies against NCLT orders under the Insolvency Code.

A party should ordinarily not invoke the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 against an NCLT order passed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code when a statutory remedy is available. The objection to bypassing the Code's appellate route was found to have substance, and the Court observed that the High Court ought not to have entertained the revision. However, because the High Court had already remanded the matter to the NCLT for fresh consideration after taking BIFR proceedings into account, and the matter had remained pending for a long time, the Supreme Court declined to interfere and dismissed the special leave petitions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court ought to have entertained a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against an order of the National Company Law Tribunal passed in an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, when the statute provided a remedy against that order.

Analysis: The petitioners had bypassed the statutory remedy available under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and instead invoked the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The objection to such entertainment was found to have substance. At the same time, the High Court had already remanded the matter to the National Company Law Tribunal for fresh consideration after taking into account the proceedings before the BIFR, and the proceedings had remained pending for a considerable time.

Conclusion: The Court declined to interfere with the High Court's order and dismissed the special leave petitions, while observing that the High Court ought not to have entertained the revision under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

---