TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 1993
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons 111, 397, 398, 402, 403 & 406 of the Companies Act, 1956 r/w Section 59 of the Companies Act, 2013 alleging wrongful transfer of Petitioners' shares in favour of the Respondents. The case was originally filed and registered by the erstwhile Company Law Board ('CLB' in Short) which was subsequently transferred to National Company Law Tribunal (herein referred to as 'Tribunal') Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh. 2. The case was heard by Division Bench consisting of Hon'ble Member(Judicial) and Hon'ble Member (Technical) and on hearing, the Judgment was reserved. 3. On 30th September, 2016, two Hon'ble Members passed separate orders, disagreeing with each other. Hon'ble Member (Technical) held that the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on difference of opinion for consideration by a third Member was also not delivered in the open Court. In the administrative side, both the Hon'ble Members recording their dissent and referring to the points of difference, forwarded the matter in the administrative side to the Hon'ble President of the National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench. The Hon'ble President also did not list the matter nor pronounce any order(s) and from its administrative side ordered to place the matter before a Third Hon'ble Member(Judicial). 6. The Third Hon'ble Member(Judicial) heard the parties and passed a detailed order on 2nd June, 2017 but curiously, the said order was also not pronounced in the open Court, nor a copy of the sam....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Respondents accepted that the difference of opinion recorded by both the Hon'ble Members on 30th September, 2016 were not pronounced in the open Court. It also accepted that on 30th September, 2016, the case was not listed for pronouncement of the Judgment/order. The parties could come to know from office that there is difference of opinion. Learned Counsel for the Respondents has also admitted that the order passed by the Third Hon'ble Member(Judicial) on 2nd June, 2017 was also not pronounced in the open Court. It was neither listed on the said date, nor copies were supplied. 10. Section 419 of the Companies Act, 2013 deals with the 'Benches of the Tribunal'. Sub-Section (5) therein stipulates the manner in which ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal is required to pass order after giving parties in a proceeding before it, a reasonable opportunity being heard, in terms of Section 420 of the Companies Act, 2013. As per sub-Section (3) of Section 420, the Tribunal is required to forward the copy of every order passed under Section 420 to the parties concerned as apparent from said provision and quoted below: "420. Orders of Tribunal. - (1) The Tribunal may, after giving the parties to any proceeding before it, a reasonable opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit. (2) The Tribunal may, at any time within two years from the date of the order, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, 2013, the Tribunal is required to give hearing in an open Court. Once such hearing is given in the open Court, the Court or the Tribunal, while passing an order is also required to pronounce order in the open Court. 15. Under sub-Section (3) of Section 421, the Tribunal is required to send the copy of every order passed under Section 420, which is also required to be followed in a petition filed under Section 241 of the Companies Act, 2013 and other petitions. The Principle of Natural Justice is also require that the parties should be informed of the order pronounced by the Court/Tribunal. Such information can be given either by following prescribed procedure or by informing the parties that the matter will be listed for judgment in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... appeal before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013. 17. Aforesaid provisions having not followed in the present case, we set aside the impugned order dated 27th June, 2017 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in CP No. 163(ND)/2013, RT No. 46/2016 and declare the decision(s) rendered by the Hon'ble Third Member(Judicial) on 2nd June, 2017 illegal and void and set aside the said order. 18. The case is remitted to the Hon'ble President, National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, who in his turn will direct the Registry to provide free certified copies of the difference of opinion/order passed by two Hon'ble Members comprising Hon'ble Member ....