Supreme Court Shifts NCLAT Case to Delhi After Alleged Attempt to Influence Judge

The Supreme Court has transferred a commercial dispute from the Chennai Bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) to its Principal Bench in Delhi. The move came after a judicial member of the Chennai Bench, Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, stated that a retired High Court judge tried to influence him in favour of one of the parties.

A Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked the NCLAT President to list the appeal before his Delhi Bench and decide it after hearing both sides at the earliest.

The Supreme Court also said that Justice Sharma’s allegation will be examined on the administrative side. According to the Court, the issue raises concerns of “vital public importance”, and the competent authority should review all available material and take appropriate steps.

The Bench added that the matter would be treated as a representation containing important information meant for the Chief Justice of India (CJI) to consider. “Let the law take its own course,” the Court observed.

Background of the Issue

In August, Justice Sharma disclosed in open court that he had received a message on his mobile phone through a retired High Court judge, apparently attempting to influence the outcome of the case. He showed the message to the lawyers present and then recused himself from hearing the matter.

The case involves an appeal against an order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Hyderabad, which had admitted KLSR Infratech Limited into the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) on the basis of a plea filed by AS Met Corp Private Limited.

The Chennai Bench of NCLAT had heard the appeal on June 18 and reserved its order. However, due to the recusal on August 13, the decision could not be delivered.

AS Met Corp later approached the Supreme Court seeking a criminal investigation into the alleged attempt to influence the judge. The Court, however, chose to handle the matter administratively.

This is not the first time Justice Sharma has stepped aside from a case due to personal or external factors. In 2024, he recused himself from hearings involving Byju’s because he had previously represented the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), which was a party in the proceedings. That year, he also withdrew from a case related to Jeppiar Cements after stating that his “real brother” had tried to influence him.