Printland Digital (India) Pvt. Ltd. filed an application before the Adjudicating Authority to recall an order that closed its right to file a reply as a Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application. Printland Digital (India) Pvt. Ltd. then appealed to the NCLAT. The appellant argued that the Tribunal had the jurisdiction to recall its order in terms of Rule 11 of NCLT Rules, 2016 because it had not decided any substantial issue on merits. The respondent argued that the appellant's conduct does not allow it to seek interference because sufficient opportunities were granted. The NCLAT allowed the appeal and remanded the case back to the Adjudicating Authority to consider the application on merits and decide the same in accordance with law.

Printland Digital (India) Pvt. Ltd. filed an application before the Adjudicating Authority to recall an order that closed its right to file a reply as a Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application. Printland Digital (India) Pvt. Ltd. then appealed to the NCLAT. The appellant argued that the Tribunal had the jurisdiction to recall its order in terms of Rule 11 of NCLT Rules, 2016 because it had not decided any substantial issue on merits. The respondent argued that the appellant's conduct does not allow it to seek interference because sufficient opportunities were granted. The NCLAT allowed the appeal and remanded the case back to the Adjudicating Authority to consider the application on merits and decide the same in accordance with law.