https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313793 An order made by a single Judicial Member was invalid where the matter had been heard by a statutorily required two-Member Bench under the Companies Act, 2013, and no Presidential authorisation for single-Member exercise of jurisdiction was shown. Rules 151 and 152 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 did not cure the defect because the order was neither a valid pronouncement on behalf of the Bench nor an order prepared and signed in the manner required when a Member is unavailable. The impugned order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision in accordance with law. en-us Wed, 16 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 May 2024 21:17:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313793 An order made by a single Judicial Member was invalid where the matter had been heard by a statutorily required two-Member Bench under the Companies Act, 2013, and no Presidential authorisation for single-Member exercise of jurisdiction was shown. Rules 151 and 152 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 did not cure the defect because the order was neither a valid pronouncement on behalf of the Bench nor an order prepared and signed in the manner required when a Member is unavailable. The impugned order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision in accordance with law. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Wed, 16 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313793