RAMA NARANG v. RAMESH NARANG & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
appropriate that till the petition is disposed of, as an interim
Provisions considered
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 s. 2(b)
- Companies Act, 2013 ss. 212, 397, 398, 403
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
- Constitution of India art. 142
- Income Tax Act, 1961
Judgment
and the orders passed thereon, would amount to respondent’s committing contempt of this Court. Even if the objection is raised to the jurisdiction of a forum, it has jurisdiction to pass interim orders till it finally decides the issue of jurisdiction and such orders are binding on the parties till the issue of jurisdiction is decided. However, it should not be construed, that the proceedings under the CLB were maintainable in law. Since the proceedings are pending final adjudication, the parties would be at liberty to raise all issues available to them including the issue of jurisdiction. Also, this is not a case wherein directions as sought, should be issued under Article 142 of the Constitution. On Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, coming in force, the proceedings which are pending before the CLB, now stand transferred to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). It would be appropriate for the parties to invoke the jurisdiction of NCLT for seeking such orders as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances in accordance with law. [Paras 81, 84][440-D-H; 441-C, F-H] Pratap Singh and Another v. Gurbaksh Singh [1962] SCR 2 Suppl. 838; Mehar Rusi Dalal (Mrs.) v. T.K. Banerjee and Others (2004) 5 SCC 119; Niaz Mohammad and Others v. State of Haryana and Others (1994) 6 SCC 332 : [1994] 3 Suppl. SCR 720 ; Kanwar Singh Saini v. High Court of Delhi (2012) 4 SCC 307 : [2011] 15 SCR 972; Debabrata Bandopadbyay and Others v. State of West Bengal and Another AIR 1969 SC 189 : [1969] SCR 304 and Tayabbhai M. Bagasarwalla and Another v. Hind Rubber Industries (P) Ltd. And Others (1997) 3 SCC 443 : [1997] 2 SCR 152– relied on. Hrishikesh Sanyal v. A.P. Bagchi ILR 1940 All 710 and Radhey Lal v. Niranjan Nath AIR 1941 All 95 – held approved. Rama Narang v. Ramesh Narang and Another (2006) 11 SCC 114 : [2006] 3 SCR 1068; Rama Narang (V) v. Ramesh Narang and Another (2009) 16 SCC 126 : [2007] 3 SCR 1099; Vijay Laxmi and Others v. Prabhu Devi and Others (2017) 11 SCC 169; State Bank of India v. Ajit Jain and Others (1995) 1 Suppl. SCC 683; Re: Vinay Chandra Mishra (The Alleged Contemnor) RAMA NARANG v. RAMESH NARANG AND OTHERS 395
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: appropriate that till the petition is disposed of, as an interim
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 — s. 2(b); Companies Act, 2013 — ss. 212, 397, 398, 403; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Constitution of India — art. 142; Income Tax Act, 1961.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Supreme Court of India, on 12 Dec 2001. The bench was A M KHANWILKAR, B R GAVAI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.