Bombay High Court
Heena Metal Private Limited vs Union Of India on 21 August, 2024
Author: K.R. Shriram
Bench: K.R. Shriram
2024:BHC-OS:12780-DB
ppn 1/4 502.wpl-26025.24.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
by PRACHI
PRACHI PRANESH
PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR
NANDIWADEKAR
Date: 2024.08.22
14:07:02 +0530 WRIT PETITION (L) NO.26025 OF 2024
Heena Metal Pvt. Ltd. ....Petitioner
V/s.
Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents
----
Mr. Kumar Harshvardhan i/by Mr. Prasad V. Paranjape for petitioner.
Mr. Jitendra B. Mishra for respondents.
----
CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 21st AUGUST 2024
P.C. :
1 Not on board. Upon mentioning, taken on production board.
2 This petition has been filed challenging an order-in-appeal dated 22 nd
March 2024 and an order dated 7 th May 2024 rejecting the petitioner's
miscellaneous application.
3 The only ground on which the order-in-appeal dated 22 nd March 2024
dismissing the petitioner's appeal was passed is that petitioner has not filed
the Board Resolution authorising the Director who verified the appeal.
Admittedly, petitioner was never called upon to file the same. In a similar
ppn 2/4 502.wpl-26025.24.doc
matter in Writ Petition No.11298 of 2024, this Court had, by an order
dated 13th August 2024, set aside the order passed by the Appellate
Authority and remanded it for de novo consideration. The said order reads
as under :-
"1. The order dated 29th May 2024 has been impugned on various grounds. One of
the grounds is that the appeal has been dismissed on the basis that the appeal has not
been signed by authorised signatory and the Appellant has not submitted Board
Resolution under the Companies Act, 1956, appointing the said person as authorised
signatory to sign the appeals, documents or any other proof of his being authorised
signatory of Appellant. Appeal has been signed and verified by one Akshaya P. Herle.
We find in the impugned order the Appellate Authority admits that an affidavit has
been signed and verified by the same Akshaya P. Herle reiterating the arguments made
during the personal hearing. In our view, if the Appellate Authority wanted to verify
the authority of Akshaya P. Herle, he was duty bound to call upon Appellant, if he had
any doubts with regard to the authority. In this case, in our view, if only the Appellate
Authority had bothered to check the GST portal of Appellant, he would have found that
Akshaya P. Herle was an authorised signatory.
2. When we brought all these to the notice of Mr. Mishra, on instructions from the
same officer, i.e., Sumit Kumar, who is present in the Court, Mr. Mishra stated that the
impugned order could be quashed and set aside and the matter remanded for denovo
consideration. Ordered accordingly.
3. Appellate Authority who will hear this appeal shall give personal hearing to
Appellant, notice whereof shall be communicated atleast 5 working days in advance.
The order to be passed shall be a reasoned order dealing with all submissions of
Appellant. If the Appellate Authority is going to rely on any order or judgment of any
Court or Tribunal or any other forum, a list thereof shall be made available along with
the notice for personal hearing. If the order or a judgment is unreported then a copy
thereof shall also be made available along with the notice. This is to enable Appellant
to deal with/distinguish the judgment or the order.
4. The appeal shall be disposed by 30th November 2024.
5. All rights and contentions are kept open to the parties.
ppn 3/4 502.wpl-26025.24.doc
6 We hasten to add that we have not made any observations on the merits of the
matter.
7 Petition disposed."
4 Mr. Mishra in fairness, as an officer of the Court, states that even
though sufficient notice has not been given of this petition, having
considered the impugned order, this Court may dispose this petition as well
in the same line as Writ Petition No.11298 of 2024.
5 In these circumstances, we set aside the order-in-appeal dated 22 nd
March 2024 and remand the matter for de novo consideration.
6 Appellate Authority who will hear this appeal shall give personal
hearing to Appellant, notice whereof shall be communicated atleast 5
working days in advance. The order to be passed shall be a reasoned order
dealing with all submissions of Appellant. If the Appellate Authority is
going to rely on any order or judgment of any Court or Tribunal or any
other forum, a list thereof shall be made available along with the notice for
personal hearing. If the order or a judgment is unreported then a copy
thereof shall also be made available along with the notice. This is to enable
Appellant to deal with/distinguish the judgment or the order.
7 The appeal shall be disposed by 30th November 2024.
8 All rights and contentions are kept open to the parties.
9 We hasten to add that we have not made any observations on the
ppn 4/4 502.wpl-26025.24.doc
merits of the matter.
10 Consequently, the order dated 7th May 2024 does not survive and
same is quashed and set aside.
11 Petition disposed.
(JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)
