Gaurav kumar Prataising company secretry cs: 21. It cannot be gainsaid that if an order/judgment of a ‘Tribunal’ is not pronounced at all, the same is a nullity in the ‘eye of law’,
[9/7, 15:23] Gaurav kumar Pcs: 21. It cannot be gainsaid that if an order/judgment of a ‘Tribunal’ is not pronounced at all, the same is a nullity in the ‘eye of law’, considering the fact that the ‘pronouncement’ is primarily a judicial act, which is the ‘Sanctum Sanctorum of any judicial proceedings’ in our ‘justice delivery system’, as opined by this ‘Tribunal’.
22. It is to be relevantly mentioned that ‘Pronouncement of Order’ is quite distinct from communicating/informing/intimating a deliverance of an order. At any cost, ‘Tribunal’ cannot dispense with justice. In reality, it must discharge its duties/function with a sole aim and purpose of ‘Dispensing Justice’.
23. If an order/judgment is delivered by a ‘Tribunal’ ignoramus of rules, then, it will result in untold hardship, misery and unerringly leading to a miscarriage of justice. Moreover, ‘expediency in pronouncement’ of an ‘Order’/‘Judgment’ by a ‘Tribunal’ is not desirable/palatable, in the earnest opinion of this ‘Tribunal’.
24. No wonder, a Judgment/Order of a Court of Law/‘Tribunal’/‘Appellate Tribunal’ is to be written only after deep travail and positive vein. The term ‘communication’ means making known or sharing or imparting. In legal parlance, it means to officially or solemnly, to declare or affirm as affirm the pronouncement of an ‘Order’/‘Judgment’. It is to be remembered that pronouncement of an ‘Order’/‘Judgment’ of a Court of Law/a Tribunal is not an empty ritualistic formality. Undoubtedly, the ‘Tribunal’/‘Appellate Tribunal’ is performing/discharging a solemn judicial function. The ‘Adjudicating Authority’ as per Section 5(1) of the I & B Code is the National Company Law Tribunal.
[9/7, 15:23] Gaurav kumar Pcs: Won an appeal against nclt Bengaluru , registrar of nclt Bengaluru and the party
[9/7, 15:35] Gaurav kumar Pcs: Practicing company secretary
