{"id":200840,"date":"2018-08-29T18:00:13","date_gmt":"2018-08-29T12:30:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=200840"},"modified":"2018-08-30T09:55:46","modified_gmt":"2018-08-30T04:25:46","slug":"no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/","title":{"rendered":"No restriction on conversion of Tata Sons to private limited company; was a \u2018hybrid\u2019 company all along: NCLAT"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): <\/strong>A two-member bench comprising of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, Member (Judicial) passed orders at the stage of admission of appeals filed by Cyrus Investments against the judgment of National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai whereby it dismissed appellant\u2019s applications filed under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013 alleging oppression and mismanagement on the part of the respondents.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">At the stage of admission of the appeal, the appellant prayed for an interim order of stay on the conversion of the respondent &#8211; \u2018Tata Sons Ltd.\u2019 from a <em>public limited company <\/em>to a <em>private limited company<\/em>. The appellant submitted that Tata Sons was a <em>public limited company<\/em>. It cannot convert into a <em>private limited company <\/em>without amending its <em>Articles of Association<\/em> which is subject to approval of National Company Law Tribunal, as mandated by Section 14. The question which arose for consideration was <em>whether Section 14 was applicable to the case of Tata Sons<\/em>? The respondent made submissions to support its stand that it was actually a private company all along.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Appellate Tribunal considered the submissions made by both the parties and did not find any plausible ground to stop the conversion of Tata Sons to a private limited company. While reaching this conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal appraised itself of the following facts (as submitted by the respondent):<\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>Tata Sons was incorporated as a <em>private company<\/em> in 1917. It continued to remain so under the Companies Act, 1956.<\/li>\n<li><em>Articles of Association<\/em> of Tata Sons contained three restrictions which are applicable to <em>private companies<\/em> in terms of Section 3(1)(iii) of the Companies Act, 1956.<\/li>\n<li>Appellant became shareholder of Tata Sons when it was a private company.<\/li>\n<li>Companies (Amendment) Act, 1974 amended Section 43-A which provides that if average annual turnover of a <em>private company<\/em> exceeds a prescribed amount, than it would be a <em>deemed public company<\/em>. Proviso thereto also provides that even after becoming a <em>deemed public company<\/em>, such company can retain matters specified in Section 3(1)(iii) in its <em>Articles of Association<\/em>.<\/li>\n<li>Tata Sons being such a company, became a <em>deemed public company <\/em>while retaining the characteristics of a <em>private company <\/em>in terms on Section 3(1)(iii).<\/li>\n<li>Tata Sons continued as a <em>hybrid company<\/em>; the word <em>hybrid<\/em> denoting essentially a <em>private company <\/em>exhibiting all the restrictions of Section 3(1)(iii), which however, is a <em>deemed public company <\/em>on account of, <em>inter alia<\/em>, excess annual turnover.<\/li>\n<li>In <strong><em>Darius Rutton v. Kavasmaneck <\/em> <em>Gharda Chemicals Ltd.<\/em><\/strong>, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/61zW81qB\">(2015) 14 SCC 277<\/a> the Supreme Court held that the concept of <em>hybrid companies <\/em>was not abolished by the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2000.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Appellate Tribunal found favour with respondent\u2019s submission that <em>Articles of Association <\/em>of Tata Sons continued to be aligned with the definition of a <em>private company<\/em>; and therefore, there was no requirement to file an application under Section 14 of Companies Act, 2013. However, at the same time, Tata Sons was directed not to take steps in terms of its Article 75 and force the appellant to transfer its shares as the appeal was pending and such action could affect the merits of the appeal because in such a situation, the respondent would cease to be members of the respondent. The appeal is posted for hearing on September 24, 2018, at 2:00 pm. [Cyrus Investments (P) Ltd. v. Tata Sons Ltd., Company Appeal (AT) No. 254 of 2018, dated 24-08-2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): A two-member bench comprising of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, Member (Judicial) <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":153604,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[31652,31618,31651,31653,31016],"class_list":["post-200840","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-articles-of-association","tag-private-limited-company","tag-public-limited-company","tag-sections-241-and-242-of-the-companies-act-2013","tag-tata-sons"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>No restriction on conversion of Tata Sons to private limited company; was a \u2018hybrid\u2019 company all along: NCLAT | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"No restriction on conversion of Tata Sons to private limited company; was a \u2018hybrid\u2019 company all along: NCLAT\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): A two-member bench comprising of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, Member (Judicial)\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-08-29T12:30:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-30T04:25:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"844\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/\",\"name\":\"No restriction on conversion of Tata Sons to private limited company; was a \u2018hybrid\u2019 company all along: NCLAT | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-08-29T12:30:13+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-30T04:25:46+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":844},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"No restriction on conversion of Tata Sons to private limited company; was a \u2018hybrid\u2019 company all along: NCLAT\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"No restriction on conversion of Tata Sons to private limited company; was a \u2018hybrid\u2019 company all along: NCLAT | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"No restriction on conversion of Tata Sons to private limited company; was a \u2018hybrid\u2019 company all along: NCLAT","og_description":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT): A two-member bench comprising of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, Member (Judicial)","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-08-29T12:30:13+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-30T04:25:46+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":844,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/","name":"No restriction on conversion of Tata Sons to private limited company; was a \u2018hybrid\u2019 company all along: NCLAT | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg","datePublished":"2018-08-29T12:30:13+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-30T04:25:46+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg","width":1330,"height":844},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/29\/no-restriction-on-conversion-of-tata-sons-to-private-limited-company-was-a-hybrid-company-all-along-nclat\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"No restriction on conversion of Tata Sons to private limited company; was a \u2018hybrid\u2019 company all along: NCLAT"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":246198,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/26\/reinstatement-by-nclat-too-big-a-pill-for-perhaps-even-cyrus-mistry-to-swallow-heres-why-supreme-court-upheld-cyrus-mistrys-removal-as-chairman-by-the-tata-sons\/","url_meta":{"origin":200840,"position":0},"title":"&#8216;Reinstatement by NCLAT &#8220;too big a pill&#8221; for perhaps even Cyrus Mistry to swallow&#8217;; Here&#8217;s why Supreme Court upheld Cyrus Mistry&#8217;s removal as Chairman by the Tata Sons","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 26, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"\"NCLAT appears to have granted the relief of reinstatement gratis without any foundation in pleadings, without any prayer and without any basis in law, thereby forcing upon the appellant an Executive Chairman, who now is unable to support his own reinstatement.\u00a0\"","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":235683,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/09\/12\/unpacking-the-scope-of-oppression-prejudice-and-mismanagement-under-the-companies-act-2013\/","url_meta":{"origin":200840,"position":1},"title":"Unpacking the scope of oppression, prejudice and mismanagement under the Companies Act, 2013 [SCC Archives]","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 12, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"by Umakanth Varottil\u2020","rel":"","context":"In &quot;OP. ED.&quot;","block_context":{"text":"OP. ED.","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/companies-act-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/companies-act-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/companies-act-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/companies-act-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/09\/companies-act-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":219161,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/05\/nclat-pre-existing-dispute-regarding-salary-payable-renders-s-9-ibc-application-not-maintainable\/","url_meta":{"origin":200840,"position":2},"title":"NCLAT | Pre-existing dispute regarding salary payable renders S. 9 IBC application not maintainable","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 5, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi: The Bench comprising of S.J. Mukhopadhaya (Chairperson) and A.I.S Cheema, Member (Technical) and Kanthi Narahari, Member (Technical) declared an appeal filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 not maintainable in view of the pre-existing dispute. In the present\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":223895,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/01\/07\/tata-v-mistry-nclat-explains-why-roc-cannot-take-advantage-of-s-43-a2-a-of-companies-act-1956-clarifies-no-aspersion-cast-on-roc-in-earlier-order\/","url_meta":{"origin":200840,"position":3},"title":"Tata v. Mistry | NCLAT explains why RoC cannot take advantage of S. 43-A(2-A) of Companies Act, 1956; Clarifies, no aspersion cast on RoC in earlier order","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"January 7, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT):\u00a0A Bench of Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Chairperson, and Justice Bansi Lal Bhat, Member (Judicial), dismissed the interlocutory application preferred by the Registrar of Companies, Mumbai, seeking amendment of the NCLAT's Judgment dated 18-12-2019 (\"earlier judgment\") wherein the removal of Cyrus Mistry from the Chairmanship of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/NCLAT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":50541,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/06\/04\/national-company-law-tribunal-constituted-new-perspectives-for-dispute-resolution\/","url_meta":{"origin":200840,"position":4},"title":"National Company Law Tribunal Constituted \u2013 New Perspectives for Dispute Resolution","author":"Sucheta","date":"June 4, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"The Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) vide a notification dated 1 June 2016 has constituted the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and its appellate authority, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) with effect from such date. The principal bench of the NCLT is to be located at New Delhi,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Legislation Updates&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Legislation Updates","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/legislationupdates\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/DSC_4762-e1474523869607.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/DSC_4762-e1474523869607.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/DSC_4762-e1474523869607.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/DSC_4762-e1474523869607.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/DSC_4762-e1474523869607.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":162564,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/10\/10\/cyrus-investments-plea-transfer-company-petition-tata-sons-tribunals-delhi-forum-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":200840,"position":5},"title":"Cyrus Investment&#8217;s plea of transfer of company petition against Tata Sons to Tribunal&#8217;s Delhi forum dismissed","author":"Saba","date":"October 10, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi: Cyrus Investment, the petitioners filed an application under Rule 11, read with Rule 16 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 with a prayer for transfer\/reassignment of the Company Petition No. 82\/2016 pending before the NCLT, Mumbai Bench to any other appropriate Bench other than the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"National Company Law Tribunal","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/10\/NCLT.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/200840","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=200840"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/200840\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/153604"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=200840"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=200840"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=200840"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}