Able Automobiles Private Limited, Shri Devaki Nandan Singhal, Shri Aravind Singhal, Shri Vikas Singhal & Shri Vinay Singhal v. Smt. Rekha Singhal, Registrar of Companies & Shri K.J. Thomas, Kochi

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers 2025 TaxPub(CL) 2083 (NCLAT- Chny) IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA MEMBER (JUDICIAL) & INDEVAR PANDEY MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Able Automobiles Private Limited, Shri Devaki Nandan Singhal, Shri Aravind Singhal, Shri Vikas Singhal & Shri Vinay Singhal v. Smt. Rekha Singhal, Registrar of Companies & Shri K.J. Thomas, Kochi Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 60/2022 (IA No. 683/2022) 23 December, 2025 Appellants by: Judy James, Advocate Respondents by: KS. Ravichandran, PCS & Ms. S. Manjula Devi, Advocates for R1 JUDGMENT *Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial)* The issue of concern, as it has been vehemently canvassed by the learned counsel for the Appellant, in the instant company appeal, while he puts a challenge to the impugned order dated 30-6-2022, rendered by the learned NCLT Kochi Bench in CP/20/KOB/2021, being the proceedings under section 59, 213, 241 & 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, read with rule 11 of the NCLT Rules of 2016, which were preferred by Respondent No. 1, herein who is the Petitioner to the company petition. 2. The Respondent No. 1/Petitioner, happens to be the estranged wife of Appellant No.3/Respondent No. 3. What has been attempted to be impressed upon by the learned counsel for the Appellant is, as if the entire controversy arisen from the personal matrimonial dispute between the Appellant No. 3 and Respondent No. 1, which the parties to the proceedings were harbouring against one another owing to their matrimonial discord. 3. But at this stage itself, we make it very clear that, any such type of an impression, which is being attempted to be created regards personal dispute, will not be having any bearing, nor would be influencing, the actual controversy, which requires consideration in the instant company appeal, and this Appellate Tribunal will be confining itself to the judicial and procedural propriety of the impugned order of 30-6-2022. 4. To be precise, the learned Tribunal, while exercising its inherent powers, and taking into consideration, the fact that since the inter-se controversy was pertaining to the shares and its transfers, which were alleged to be based upon fraudulent documents, which has been relied upon by the parties, as against one another, the learned Tribunal felt, it apt that, it ought to exercise its inherent powers, to invoke the provisions contained under rule 43 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, in order to enable the learned Tribunal to better facilitate and to effectively adjudicate upon the principal controversy, as it engaged consideration in the company petition, which is put to challenge in this company appeal, which is still a proceedings to be decided by the learned Tribunal on its merits. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers 2025 TaxPub(CL) 2083 (NCLAT- Chny)

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT CHENNAI

SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA MEMBER (JUDICIAL) & INDEVAR PANDEY MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

Able Automobiles Private Limited, Shri Devaki Nandan Singhal, Shri Aravind Singhal, Shri Vikas Singhal & Shri Vinay Singhal v. Smt. Rekha Singhal, Registrar of Companies & Shri K.J. Thomas, Kochi

Company Appeal (AT) (CH) No. 60/2022 (IA No. 683/2022)

23 December, 2025

Appellants by: Judy James, Advocate

Respondents by: KS. Ravichandran, PCS & Ms. S. Manjula Devi, Advocates for R1

JUDGMENT

Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial)

The issue of concern, as it has been vehemently canvassed by the learned counsel for the Appellant, in the instant company appeal, while he puts a challenge to the impugned order dated 30-6-2022, rendered by the learned NCLT Kochi Bench in CP/20/KOB/2021, being the proceedings under section 59, 213, 241 & 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, read with rule 11 of the NCLT Rules of 2016, which were preferred by Respondent No. 1, herein who is the Petitioner to the company petition.

2. The Respondent No. 1/Petitioner, happens to be the estranged wife of Appellant No.3/Respondent No. 3. What has been attempted to be impressed upon by the learned counsel for the Appellant is, as if the entire controversy arisen from the personal matrimonial dispute between the Appellant No. 3 and Respondent No. 1, which the parties to the proceedings were harbouring against one another owing to their matrimonial discord.

3. But at this stage itself, we make it very clear that, any such type of an impression, which is being attempted to be created regards personal dispute, will not be having any bearing, nor would be influencing, the actual controversy, which requires consideration in the instant company appeal, and this Appellate Tribunal will be confining itself to the judicial and procedural propriety of the impugned order of 30-6-2022.

4. To be precise, the learned Tribunal, while exercising its inherent powers, and taking into consideration, the fact that since the inter-se controversy was pertaining to the shares and its transfers, which were alleged to be based upon fraudulent documents, which has been relied upon by the parties, as against one another, the learned Tribunal felt, it apt that, it ought to exercise its inherent powers, to invoke the provisions contained under rule 43 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, in order to enable the learned Tribunal to better facilitate and to effectively adjudicate upon the principal controversy, as it engaged consideration in the company petition, which is put to challenge in this company appeal, which is still a proceedings to be decided by the learned Tribunal on its merits.