NCLAT Dismisses Plea for Video Recording in Essar Steel-Related Proceedings: Rules No Special Grounds Made [Read Order]

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, dismissed a plea filed by a shareholder of SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd. (SIFL) seeking video recording of appellate proceedings in the insolvency matters related to Essar Steel India Ltd. (ESIL) and Odisha Slurry Pipeline Infrastructure Ltd. (OSPIL).

Vir Jai Khosla, had moved an application under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules requesting video documentation of the hearings in Company Appeals. His contention was based on allegations of fraud and false affidavits submitted during the earlier insolvency resolution processes, which he claimed necessitated accurate and verifiable records of the current proceedings.

Khosla was not part of the original resolution proceedings and became involved only after a recall application was filed by SIFL and himself, challenging an earlier order passed by the Adjudicating Authority in February 2023.

Despite not being a party to the initial CIRP stages of ESIL or OSPIL, Khosla argued that significant questions of fraud had surfaced and insisted that video recording was essential for transparency and accountability. To support his plea, he referred to prior Supreme Court and NCLAT orders that allowed video recordings in exceptional cases, including Orbit Electricals Pvt. Ltd. v. Deepak Kishan Chhabria and Standard Chartered Bank v. Satish Kumar Gupta.

The Tribunal, comprising Chairperson Justice Ashok Bhushan and Technical Member Barun Mitra, noted that permission for such recording is governed by specific conditions outlined in its administrative order dated 22.11.2024. As per paragraph 15 of the SOP, video recording is permissible only if “special reasons” are demonstrated and accepted by the Court.

“From a plain reading… it becomes clear that recording of proceedings is not to be ordinarily resorted to,” the Bench observed. It also asserted that the resolution plans for ESIL and OSPIL had already been implemented and upheld at all judicial levels, making the Applicant’s late entry into the proceedings particularly noteworthy.

The Bench stated that the Applicant had failed to present any compelling or exceptional grounds to warrant deviation from the standard procedure.

The Tribunal however reassured Khosla that all his arguments would be duly considered and recorded, and he would have ample opportunity to submit written submissions.

As a result the NCLAT dismissed the plea, ruling that no case had been made out for recording the proceedings and disposed of the matter with no order as to costs.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates