Recall application, not review, applies where hearing defects and procedural lapses undermine an insolvency proceeding order.

An application challenging an order for lack of proper hearing is to be treated as a recall application, not a review on merits, where the record does not show a valid ex parte course or completed arguments. In insolvency and company proceedings, Section 424 of the Companies Act, 2013, read with the applicable NCLT Rules and natural justice, requires fair opportunity and proper procedural compliance. Failure to deal separately with an application for taking additional documents on record may indicate procedural defect and non-application of mind. The impugned order was found unsustainable, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration of the pending applications.

---

---

Issues: Whether the application seeking recall of the order dated 19.02.2024 was wrongly treated as a review, and whether the absence of a proper hearing and failure to follow the prescribed procedural course vitiated the impugned order.

Analysis: The Tribunal's procedure in insolvency and company matters is governed by the principles of natural justice and the procedural framework under Section 424 of the Companies Act, 2013, read with the applicable NCLT Rules and the corresponding civil procedure principles. Where a party has not been afforded a proper hearing, and the record does not show that the matter was validly taken ex parte or that arguments were concluded before pronouncement, an application complaining of such procedural infirmity is a recall application and not a review on merits. The failure to separately deal with the application for taking additional documents on record further indicated a procedural defect and non-application of mind.

Conclusion: The impugned order was held unsustainable, the application was directed to be considered as a recall application, and the matter was remitted to the Tribunal for fresh consideration of the pending applications, subject to costs.

---