3 min readNew DelhiNov 15, 2025 03:28 AM IST
First published on: Nov 15, 2025 at 03:28 AM IST
THE SUPREME Court Friday transferred the case in which a judicial member of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Chennai Bench, had claimed that he was approached by a member of the higher judiciary for a favourable order, to NCLAT’s Principal Bench in the Capital.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi also directed that a petition seeking a court-monitored investigation into the matter be placed before the Chief Justice of India so that an appropriate decision can be taken on the administrative side.
The court said, “In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we request Hon’ble President of the NCLAT to list the said appeal before his Lordship’s bench and decide the same, after notice to the contesting parties, at the earliest.”
The order said, “As regard to the various other issues, there can be no quarrel that all such issues are of vital public importance. We believe that the competent authority must have examined the available material and taken necessary steps… In any case, all the issues can be effectively dealt with by the Chief Justice of India on the administrative side. We thus deem it appropriate to treat this… as a representation bringing on record some material and vital information for the consideration of the Chief Justice of India.”
Appearing for the petitioner, A.S. Met Corp Private Limited, Advocate Prashant Bhushan said there are two things which the CJI can do. “One is an in-house enquiry. Other is, this involves a purported offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act and therefore either an FIR which also has to be with the permission of the Chief Justice as it involves a judge,” he submitted.
Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma, who is a Judicial Member of the NCLAT, Chennai Bench, had in the course of hearing a Company Appeal arising from insolvency proceedings against KLSR Infratech Ltd., publicly recorded that he had been approached by “‘one of the most revered members of the higher judiciary of this country” with a request to deliver a favourable order.
In open court, Justice Sharma also showed the messages received on his phone, stating that he had preserved them so that he can produce them if any question arose. Thereafter, he recused himself and directed that the matter be placed before the Chairperson of the NCLAT for reallocation.
Met Corp was the respondent in the proceedings before the NCLAT bench. Advocate Bhushan said, “According to our information, the message came from the Chief Justice of a High Court”. He added that a detailed investigation may not be needed as Justice Sharma had preserved the messages which he received.
Met Corp was the respondent in the proceedings before the NCLAT bench. 
Share
