The Supreme Court has reiterated that any request made by it to a court or tribunal must be construed as a judicial direction rather than a mere expression of expectation, cautioning that non-compliance with such directions would be viewed seriously.
A Bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran made the observation while expressing concern over the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) not hearing a matter despite an earlier request from the apex court to take it up on a specified date.
“When the Supreme Court makes a request to any Court or Tribunal, it has to be construed as a direction and not just a request,” the Bench observed.
The matter arose from a miscellaneous application concerning insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). In an earlier order, the Supreme Court had requested the NCLAT to hear the appeal on July 23, as the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) had reserved its order on an application filed under Section 7 of the IBC.
However, during the subsequent hearing before the Supreme Court on October 27, counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the NCLAT had not taken up the appeal on the date indicated by the apex court. In the meantime, the NCLT had pronounced its order admitting the Section 7 insolvency application.
Taking note of these developments, the Supreme Court sought an explanation from the NCLAT regarding its failure to hear the matter in accordance with the earlier request.
The Bench emphasised that communications from the Supreme Court cannot be disregarded merely because they are framed as requests rather than expressed in the language of formal directions. Such
The post Supreme Court says judicial requests to courts, tribunals carry force of directions appeared first on India Legal.