# In the matter of Dineshchandra Bhagwandas Jariwala Vs. RP of Swiss Ribbon Pvt. Ltd. George Samuel R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5042 of 2021 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2021 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5042 of 2021 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BRINGING HEIRS) NO. 3 of 2021 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5042 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5090 of 2021 With R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5088 of 2021

> HC judgment dated 2021-10-26. Citation: TCN-2021-HC-00012. The case involves a civil application in the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, concerning…

- **Court:** HC
- **Order date:** 26 Oct 2021
- **Citation:** TCN-2021-HC-00012
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-chandigarh-bench/dineshchandra-bhagwandas-jariwala-vs-rp-of-swiss-ribbon-pvt-ltd-george-samuel-rs-2770b274

## Summary

### Background

The case involves a civil application in the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, concerning R/Special Civil Application No. 5042 of 2021, along with connected civil applications. The primary issue revolves around the pronouncement of a judgment by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in CP (IB) No. 249 of 2018, where the applicant contends that the NCLT did not notify the matter for pronouncement on the date the judgment was declared. The petitioner argues that this failure deprived them of the opportunity to request a stay of the order. The Bombay High Court had previously quashed a similar order and remanded the matter back to NCLT. The High Court is considering whether to issue directions to the NCLT to address the petitioner's grievance.

## Facts

The key facts are as follows: A judgment was declared by the NCLT in CP (IB) No. 249 of 2018 on 27.7.2021. The applicant contends that the NCLT did not notify the matter for pronouncement on that date. The petitioner claims this failure deprived them of the opportunity to request a stay of the order. The petitioner received a copy of the order on 28.7.2021. The Bombay High Court had previously quashed a similar order and remanded the matter back to NCLT. The NCLT had already pronounced a decision on 1st March, 2021, in certain I.A.s related to the case, but the petitioners were allegedly unaware of this pronouncement. The learned members who pronounced the order on 1st March, 2021, have demitted the office. The matters were adjourned from time to time. The respondent

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the failure of the NCLT to notify the matter for pronouncement on the date the judgment was …

**Ratio:** The ratio is based on the principle of procedural fairness and the right of a party to

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the failure to notify the pronouncement date could have prevented

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation focuses on the importance of adhering to procedural rules to

…

**Application:** The ratio and reasoning are applied to the specific facts of the case, where

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** BHARGAV D.…
- **Appellants:** DINESHCHANDRA…
- **Respondents:** SWISS RIBBONS…; RESOLUTION…

## Timeline

- **2020-01-19 — Matter Reserved for…**: The respondent no.5-National Company Law Tribunal (`NCLT' for short) had heard all the…
- **2021-03-01 — Order Pronounce…**: The decision was already pronounced on 1st March, 2021, in certain I.A.s related to the…

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/high-courts-chandigarh-bench/dineshchandra-bhagwandas-jariwala-vs-rp-of-swiss-ribbon-pvt-ltd-george-samuel-rs-2770b274