Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the transfer of the case from one Bench to another under Rule 16(d) of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 required recorded reasons or disclosed circumstances warranting interference.
Analysis: Rule 16(d) empowers the President to transfer a case from one Bench to another when circumstances so warrant, and the exercise of that administrative power is part of the President's roster control and bench management. The transfer order was communicated and did not justify interference in appellate jurisdiction. The reliance on the principle that administrative decisions affecting rights may require reasons was distinguished because the transfer of the case did not prejudice the appellant's legal rights in a manner attracting that principle.
Conclusion: The transfer order did not warrant interference, and the appeal failed.