Liberal construction of sufficient cause justifies condonation of inordinate delay where criminal proceedings and jail confinement explained the defau...
NCLAT considered company appeals challenging an order dismissing contempt proceedings arising from an interlocutory order passed under the I&B Code. The Appellate Tribunal held that, under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, an appeal lies only from an order or decision of a High Court "to punish for contempt," i.e., an order imposing punishment under Section 12, and not from a mere dismissal of a contempt petition. As the impugned order only rejected the contempt petition without awarding any punishment, it did not qualify as an appealable order under Section 19. NCLAT further noted that the I&B Code does not incorporate the Contempt of Courts Act by reference. Consequently, the company appeals filed by the anonymized appellants against dismissal of contempt were held not maintainable and were dismissed.
NCLAT considered company appeals challenging an order dismissing contempt proceedings arising from an interlocutory order passed under the I&B Code. The Appellate Tribunal held that, under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, an appeal lies only from an order or decision of a High Court "to punish for contempt," i.e., an order imposing punishment under Section 12, and not from a mere dismissal of a contempt petition. As the impugned order only rejected the contempt petition without awarding any punishment, it did not qualify as an appealable order under Section 19. NCLAT further noted that the I&B Code does not incorporate the Contempt of Courts Act by reference. Consequently, the company appeals filed by the anonymized appellants against dismissal of contempt were held not maintainable and were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
