https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401486 Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016 confers only inherent power to pass orders necessary to secure justice or prevent abuse of process, and it does not create a general power of review. The Tribunal noted that Section 420 of the Companies Act, 2013 is confined to rectification of mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to reappraise evidence or substitute a fresh factual finding. Even if the earlier observation on the alleged guarantee was wrong, correction would require reopening the merits, which lay beyond Rule 11. The review application was therefore not maintainable. en-us Mon, 07 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Dec 2020 11:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401486 Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016 confers only inherent power to pass orders necessary to secure justice or prevent abuse of process, and it does not create a general power of review. The Tribunal noted that Section 420 of the Companies Act, 2013 is confined to rectification of mistakes apparent from the record and cannot be used to reappraise evidence or substitute a fresh factual finding. Even if the earlier observation on the alleged guarantee was wrong, correction would require reopening the merits, which lay beyond Rule 11. The review application was therefore not maintainable. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 07 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401486