NCLT/NCLAT-Recusal

Recusal of NCLT Member is not to be forced by any Litigant to choose a Bench, it is for the judge to decide to recuse – Perfect Infraengineers Ltd. Vs. Technology Development Board – NCLT Mumbai Bench

Hon’ble NCLT Mumbai Bench held that:

(i) An Advocate owes a duty not only to his client but also to the Court. It is the bounden duty of an Advocate to consider whether such submissions, as are pleaded in the application, were justified, having regard to his and his client’s earlier conduct.
(ii) If the judges decide to recuse themselves on the basis of frivolous and baseless allegations it will be a convenient ploy to litigant to choose their own Benches by stage managing such kind of litigations.
(iii) Recusal is not to be forced by any litigant to choose a Bench. It is for the judge to decide to recuse.
(iv) No person can maintain application for recusal of the Member [Ishrat Ali Vs. The Cosmos Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr. (2023) ibclaw.in 345 NCLAT].

Recusal of NCLT Member is not to be forced by any Litigant to choose a Bench, it is for the judge to decide to recuse – Perfect Infraengineers Ltd. Vs. Technology Development Board – NCLT Mumbai Bench Read Post »

Scroll to Top