NCLAT Delhi Holds That a Quashed NCLT Order Leaves No Surviving Directions — Documents Seized Under It Must Be Returned Forthwith
Background and Context
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, recently delivered a significant ruling in Rock Bottom Mines Pvt Ltd. And Anr. Vs Sanjeev Chaudhary, reaffirming a foundational principle of judicial discipline: when an appellate forum sets aside an order in its entirety, none of the directions embedded within that order can continue to operate, exist, or be enforced in any form.
The case arose from a chain of proceedings before the NCLT, Chandigarh Bench-I, and presented the NCLAT with an opportunity to underscore that subordinate tribunals cannot selectively preserve parts of a quashed order — whether by inaction, misinterpretation, or procedural maneuvering.
Genesis of the Dispute
The controversy traces its roots to an order dated 21 August 2026 passed by the NCLT, Chandigarh Bench-I, in the course of a company petition. That order carried directions of a sweeping nature, including the following:
"i. We hereby appoint Retired Hon'ble Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court-Mr. Harminder Singh Madaan, having Mobile No.9915543025 as Administrator to give effect and oversees the directions with the help of the Police. The Administrator shall submit a report in this regard.
ii. The Jurisdictional SHO is directed to immediately confiscate all records of Respondent No. 1 Company, from 01.09.2025 onwards, whether physical or electronic, including the books of account, bank statements, invoices, e-Ravana records, weighbridge records, closed-circuit television footage, digital video recorders & hard disks.
iii. The Petitioner shall accompany the police officials/officer to help identify and carry out directions given as sr. no. (ii) and submit the same to the Administrator.
iv. The Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 are directed to not remove, transfer or dispose of the funds, assets or properties of Respondent No. 1 Company, till the next date of hearing."
These directions were issued on the very first date of hearing — without any notice being served on the respondents, without hearing the affected parties, and without the NCLT recording the prima facie satisfaction that is a judicial prerequisite before passing interim orders with serious consequences.
NCLAT's Intervention: Order Dated 2 September 2026
Aggrieved by the sweeping interim directions issued without observing basic procedural safeguards, Rock Bottom Mines Pvt Ltd. and another appellant approached the NCLAT. The appellate tribunal, taking cognisance of the procedural infirmities, quashed the order dated 21 August 2026 by its order dated 2 September 2026 and remitted the matter back to the NCLT for fresh consideration of the interim relief application.
The NCLAT's order of 2 September 2026 went unchallenged before any superior forum, making it final and binding on the NCLT. The legal consequence was unambiguous: the order dated 21 August 2026 ceased to exist in the eyes of law from that moment forward.
What Happened Before the NCLT After Remand
The Restoration Application
Following the NCLAT's order of 2 September 2026, the appellants moved Company Application No. 184 of 2026 before the NCLT on 9 September 2026. The relief sought was straightforward — immediate restoration of all documents that had been confiscated pursuant to the now-quashed order of 21 August 2026. The prayer specifically covered:
- Books of account
- Bank statements
- Invoices
- e-Ravana records
- Weighbridge records
- Closed-circuit television footage
- Digital video recorders and hard disks
The appellants explained that in the absence of access to these records, they would be unable to file an appropriate reply to the revived interim relief application — a basic right of any party to adversarial proceedings.