Hon’ble NCLAT held that:
(i) A mere running of the eye over the rule 50 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 clearly points out that the application of the Petitioner/Appellant to comply with a certified copy by paying the schedule of fees cannot be dispensed with and at best, the sending of the certified copy of final order by the authorities concerned, Free of Cost, is an obligation caused upon the Office of the Registry of the NCLT, as per NCLT Rules. Moreover, that the receipt of free of cost copy, the Petitioner/Appellant by receiving the same, and after recovering from illness, cannot be a substitute for a Certified Copy of the Impugned Order to accompany the Appeal as per Rule 22(2) of the NCLAT Rules, 2016.
(ii) To put it precisely and succinctly, the Rule 50 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 is to be read in conjunction with definition of Rule 2(9) of the NCLT Rules, 2016. To put it differently, Rule 50 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 cannot be interpreted, disjunctively, without falling back upon the words employed under Rule 2(9) of the NCLT Rules, 2016, which provides for meaning for the word ‘certified’, in relation to a ‘Copy of the Document’ as mentioned therein.
(iii) Moreover, obtaining of Free of Cost Copy is only the concern of the particular party to the effect that an order was obtained against him and as a litigant/stakeholder he/she is to pursue the further course of action, in the manner known to law and in accordance with law.