<p>The Supreme Court on Friday expunged remarks made against three sitting members of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) by a bench headed by acting chairperson Justice Bansi Lal Bhat.</p>.<p>A bench headed by Justice R F Nariman granted the relief to the petitioner's Justices (retd) Jarat Kumar Jain, Davinder Singh and Vijay Pratap Singh who were part of the bench, which had referred the matter to a five-member bench headed by the acting chairperson of the appellate tribunal.</p>.<p>"We are with you," the bench said.</p>.<p>The issue which was referred to the five-member bench was related to the entry of the book of accounts of a company and acknowledgement of the debt by the company.</p>.<p>The proceedings before the 5-member bench had arisen after a reference made by the 3-member bench comprising the three petitioners on September 25, 2020.</p>.<p>The three petitioners before the top court had prayed for expunging of remarks made by the five-member bench, saying they have just acknowledged the position in law that the larger bench was competent enough to consider the earlier verdict on the issue.</p>.<p>They said it is well-settled law that the larger bench must not venture into making personal comments against members of the referral bench only because it finds the reference order was not maintainable or not in accordance with the law.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Friday expunged remarks made against three sitting members of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) by a bench headed by acting chairperson Justice Bansi Lal Bhat.</p>.<p>A bench headed by Justice R F Nariman granted the relief to the petitioner's Justices (retd) Jarat Kumar Jain, Davinder Singh and Vijay Pratap Singh who were part of the bench, which had referred the matter to a five-member bench headed by the acting chairperson of the appellate tribunal.</p>.<p>"We are with you," the bench said.</p>.<p>The issue which was referred to the five-member bench was related to the entry of the book of accounts of a company and acknowledgement of the debt by the company.</p>.<p>The proceedings before the 5-member bench had arisen after a reference made by the 3-member bench comprising the three petitioners on September 25, 2020.</p>.<p>The three petitioners before the top court had prayed for expunging of remarks made by the five-member bench, saying they have just acknowledged the position in law that the larger bench was competent enough to consider the earlier verdict on the issue.</p>.<p>They said it is well-settled law that the larger bench must not venture into making personal comments against members of the referral bench only because it finds the reference order was not maintainable or not in accordance with the law.</p>