- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
Delhi High Court Transfers Cases to NCLT for Effective Adjudication
Delhi High Court Transfers Cases to NCLT for Effective Adjudication
Introduction
The Delhi High Court has transferred winding-up petitions filed against Vigneshwara Developwell Pvt Ltd to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). The petitions were filed under Sections 433(e), 434, and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking winding up of the respondent company due to its inability to pay the debt.
Factual Background
The petitions were pending before the Delhi High Court when an application was filed for transfer to NCLT, New Delhi. The Court considered the application and decided to transfer the matter.
Procedural Background
The transfer application was made in light of Section 434(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013, which provides for the transfer of pending proceedings under the Companies Act, 1956, to NCLT. The Court noted that a similar judgment was passed in Col. P. K. Uberoi (Retd.) & Anr. v. Vigneshwara Developwell Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., directing the transfer of winding-up proceedings to NCLT.
Issues
The primary issue before the Court was whether to transfer the winding-up petitions to NCLT.
Contentions of the Parties
Petitioner: The petitioner sought transfer of the petitions to NCLT, citing Section 434(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013.
Respondent: No contentions were reported against the transfer.
Reasoning and Analysis
The bench of Ms. Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju observed that since the present application is related to the transfer of winding-up proceedings of the respondent company to NCLT, it would be appropriate to transfer these petitions as well for effective adjudication. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to proceed further with the proceedings before NCLT in accordance with law.
Implications
This judgment highlights the Court's decision to transfer winding-up petitions to NCLT, enabling effective adjudication of the matters.



