TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 306
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016; and; ii. Direct the Applicants in the above Company Petition and their counsel to strictly comply with Rules 120 and 121 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 while making appearance in the Company Petition and all connected Interlocutory Applications. The facts in brief are as under: - 2. The Applicants herein are Respondents 1 and 2 in the Company Petition No. CP/114/KOB/2019. The said Company Petition has been filed by Respondents 1 and 2 herein and Shri Radha Ballabh Gupta to wrest control of the 3 Companies that are being managed very well by the 2nd Petitioner. During the conduct of the above cases it is found that the Applicants in the above cases and their counsel are repeatedly violating Rules 120 and 121 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016. When the said fact was brought to the notice of this Tribunal an order was passed on 10.09.2020 that Rule 121 is to be complied with. However, despite a direction in this regard, it is found that the said rules are flouted with impunity. Submissions by the Applicants. 3. The learned counsel for the Applicants herein stated that there is total 9 connected matters pending....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oses certain restrictions on appearance of legal practitioners or authorised representatives, as the case may be. Rule 121 provides as follows: - Rule 121 Restrictions on appearance - a legal practitioner or the authorised representative as the case may be, who has tendered advise in connection with the institution of any case or other proceedings before the Tribunal has drawn pleadings in connection with any such matter or has during the progress of any such matter acted for a party, shall not, appear in such case or proceeding or other matter arising therefrom or in any matter connected therewith for any person who is impressed is opposed to that of his former client, except with the prior permission of the Tribunal. Further, Rule 33 of Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette framed by the Bar Council of India provides that- Rule 33: an advocate who has, at any time advise in connection with the institution of the suit, appeal or other matter or has drawn pleadings, or acted for a party, shall not act, appear or plead for the opposite party. 6. It is further submitted that Interlocutory Applications made by an applicant claiming to be on behalf of a respondent in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....M/s. Nash Capital Partners and both these firms have the same address. The website of Nash Capital Partners displays the picture and gives details of Mr Sherry Samuel Oommen. It may be pointed out that both Mr. Sukumar Nainan Oommen and Mr. Sherry Samuel Oommen M/s.Omega Alliance and Nash Capital Partners were engaged by Applicant No.1 RBG Enterprises Private Limited and also by RBG Trading Corporation Private Limited for professional consultations. It is submitted that both RBG Enterprises Private Limited and RBG Trading Corporation Private Limited have maintained Ledger account for payments made to both the counsel through the said firms. 11. It is submitted that the very same counsel also appeared for Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, the 2nd petitioner herein in a series of cases before the Hon ble District Court, Ernakulam and before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala. The 2nd Petitioner herein was the 3rd petitioner in O.P. (Society) 186/2018 along with others and was represented by Advocates Sukumar Nainan Oommen and Sherry Samuel Oommen in all the proceedings relating to the dispute. 12. The Applicants stated that they did not wish to specifically raise this issue considering the fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....20 of NCLT Rules read with Rule 2 of the Rules framed by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala under Section, 34(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961. Therefore, there was no necessity for the arguing Counsel to file fresh vakalatnama after obtaining consent of the Adv. Philip Mathew. 16. The Respondents stated that the Applicants herein alleged that the arguing Counsel has tendered advise to the 2nd Applicant who was one among other plaintiffs in a suit in District Court, Ernakulam. There is no allegation that the issues canvassed in the suit before the District Court are even remotely connected to the issues canvassed in the CPs before this Tribunal. There is no allegation that the answering Respondents and the 4th Respondent herein had any interest in the suit before the District Court. Further, there is no allegation that a conflict of interest exists between the 2nd Applicant herein and the said Respondents due to the engagement of the arguing Counsel in the earlier suit., There is no allegation that the arguing Counsel gave advise to or entered appearance on behalf of the 2nd Applicant or the 3rd Respondent in any matter before this Tribunal and no allegation of conflict of interest....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... & 21 of the Constitution of India. 20. To fortify the above arguments the learned counsel for the Applicant, has referred to the following case laws: - S B Norohna Vs. Prem Kumari Khanna (1980) 1 SCC 52 Lanka Venkateswarulu (D) By Lrs Vs. State of A.P. (2011) 4 SCC 363 Umesh Challiyil Vs. KP Rajendran (2008) 11 SCC 740 CCE New Delhi Vs. Hari Chand Shri Gopal (2011) 1 SCC 236 21. Respondent No.3 stated that he has no objection in granting relief prayed for by the Applicants 22. On 14.01.2021 the learned counsel for the Applicant filed a rejoinder reiterating most of the contentions he has made in the IA. 23. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Applicants and the Respondents and also gone through the case laws submitted by the learned counsel for the parties to fortify their respective arguments. 24. To get further clarity on this issue, I have gone through Rule 33 of Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette framed by the Bar Council of India, which reads as under: Rule 33 : an advocate who has, at any time advise in connection with the institution of the suit, appeal or other matter or has drawn pleadings, or acted for a party, s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 36B of the Advocates Act, 1961 which reads as under: - Section 35: - Punishment of advocates for misconduct. - (1) Where on receipt of a complaint or otherwise a State Bar Council has reason to believe that any advocate on its roll has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, it shall refer the case for disposal to its disciplinary committee. 1[(1A) The State Bar Council may, either of its own motion or on application made to it by any person interested, withdraw a proceeding pending before its disciplinary committee and direct the inquiry to be made by any other disciplinary committee of that State Bar Council.] (2) The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council shall fix a date for the hearing of the case and shall cause a notice thereof to be given to the advocate concerned and to the Advocate-General of the State. (3) The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council after giving the advocate concerned and the Advocate-General an opportunity of being heard, may make any of the following orders, namely: - (a) dismiss the complaint or, where the proceedings were initiated at the instance of the State Bar Council, direct that the proceedings be filed; (....