TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1161
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed the instant Application, being IA No.1620/2025 under Rule 11 of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016, praying for recall of the order passed by it dated 25.09.2025 in CA (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.352/2023. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Applicant herein, that the Corporate Debtor (CD), M/s. Rathna Stores Pvt. Ltd., was admitted into liquidation by order of Ld. NCLT dated 14.08.2018. The Applicant took over as Liquidator of the said CD on 11.09.2018. He took steps to secure the asset of the CD, which is a 7-floor building measuring 33,000 sq. ft., standing on a land of 8,000 sq. ft., got the attachment made by Income Tax department on the said property removed and disposed of the said property, realised the proceeds an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ordinary course of the discharge of duties as the Liquidator. 4. This Appellate Tribunal after hearing both sides, dismissed the Appeal on the ground that Ld. NCLT has not erred in holding that no material has been provided to show that the steps taken by the Applicant herein while realising the assets of the liquidation estate are not routine in nature, that the time spent in taking possession of the assets of the liquidation estate and in conducting the cases before the appropriate forums to defend the CD are part of assigned duties of the Liquidator and hence it cannot be considered for exclusion, that it is the duty of the Liquidator to rectify the defects in the said assets to make them saleable and that when he had claimed and rea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nal has permitted in law to entertain a recall application. The principles of the same have been laid down by the 5-member Bench of this Appellate Tribunal in the matter of Union Bank of India v. Dinkar T. Venkatasubramanian and Ors. in IA/3961/2022 in CA(AT)(Ins) No. 729/2020 dated 25.05.2023 [(2024) 248 Comp Cas 108: 2023 SCC Online NCLAT 283]. In the said Judgement, the 5-member Bench after discussing various judgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court and NCLAT, has set out the said principles in para-16 of the judgement which reads as under: - "16. In another judgement of Budhia Swain v. Gopinath Deb, Hon'ble Supreme Court has dealt with the power to recall. In paragraphs 5, 6, 7 and 8 following has been laid down (page 400 of [1999]4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....epresented, (ii) a judgment was obtained by fraud, (iii) a party has had no notice and a decree was made against him and such party approaches the court for setting aside the decision ex debito justitiae on proof of the fact that there was no service. 7. In Corpus Juris Secundum (Volume XIX) under the Chapter 'judgment-opening and vacating' (paragraphs 265 to 284 at pages 487 to 510) the law on the subject has been stated. The grounds on which the courts may open or vacate their judgments are generally matters which render the judgment void or which are specified in statutes authorising such actions. Invalidity of the judgment of such nature as to render it void is a valid ground for vacating it at least if the in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... available but was not availed. The right to seek vacation of a judgement may be lost by waiver, estoppel or acquiescence." 7. Thus, a recall application is sustainable only when either of the elements as narrated above are present in the facts and circumstances of the same. In the present case, the Applicant alleges of errors in the face of record and that this Appellate Tribunal has failed to take cognizance of the same. We have carefully gone through the grounds raised by the Applicant to the instant Application. We find that all the points raised by the Applicant have been discussed thoroughly in our Judgement dated 25.09.2025 in arriving at the conclusion which the Applicant seeks to challenge. Further, none of the grounds which hav....