https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448496 NCLAT Principal Bench rejected an application seeking recall of its order dated 31.03.2023. The applicants alleged the order was obtained by citing judgments that were not good law, specifically two judgments whose correctness was later doubted by a three-member bench. The Tribunal held that the two-member bench had fully heard the applicants before passing the order and properly applied the doctrine of merger. The Tribunal clarified it lacks jurisdiction to review its own judgments and cannot take a different view from what was decided on 31.03.2023, rejecting the contention that the order was a nullity. en-us Tue, 16 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jan 2024 15:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448496 NCLAT Principal Bench rejected an application seeking recall of its order dated 31.03.2023. The applicants alleged the order was obtained by citing judgments that were not good law, specifically two judgments whose correctness was later doubted by a three-member bench. The Tribunal held that the two-member bench had fully heard the applicants before passing the order and properly applied the doctrine of merger. The Tribunal clarified it lacks jurisdiction to review its own judgments and cannot take a different view from what was decided on 31.03.2023, rejecting the contention that the order was a nullity. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Tue, 16 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448496