National Company Law Appellate Tribunal

What is NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) is a quasi-judicial entity in India created to adjudicate appeals against decisions made by the NCLT (National Company Law Tribunal) and other regulatory bodies under the Companies Act, 2013 as well as ancillary statutes like the Competition Act, 2002. It plays a pivotal role in resolving disputes related to corporate, competition and insolvency issues. Section 410 of the Companies Act, 2013, mandated the establishment of the NCLAT, which began its operations on June 1, 2016. It has its Principal Bench in New Delhi and an additional bench in Chennai, reflecting an effort to expand access to appellate justice across regions. Since its establishment, the NCLAT has played a significant role in the resolution of complex corporate disputes, insolvency cases, and matters related to company law in India. It has contributed to the efficiency and effectiveness of the legal system, providing a specialized forum for the resolution of appeals in the corporate and business domain.

Official Definition of NCLAT

As defined in Legislation

Companies Act, 1956 and 2013

Section 2(4) refers to NCLAT as the Appellate Tribunal which is constituted under Section 410 of the Companies Act, 2013.

Section 410 talks about the constitution of NCLAT consisting of a chairperson, judicial and technical members as appointed by the Central Government. This was created as a response to the Eradi Committee's recommendations which led to the enactment of the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, of 2002 and was incorporated under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956.

Judicial decisions around the time of NCLAT's formation acknowledged the transfer of appellate jurisdiction from the Company Law Board to the newly established NCLAT. This legislation paved the way for the creation of NCLT and NCLAT. The enactment of the Companies Act, of 2013, further solidified the legal framework for corporate governance. This legislation retained the provisions related to the NCLAT and included updated provisions, aligning with contemporary corporate challenges.

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

NCLAT is the appellate tribunal for hearing appeals against the orders passed by NCLT(s) under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), and the orders passed by Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India under Section 202 and Section 211 of IBC.

Competition Act, 2002

Competition (Amendment) Act 2007, introduced Chapter VIIIA, which provided for an appellate tribunal, namely, the Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT). With the notification of the substantive enforcement provisions of the Act from May 2009, CCI began fullfledged functioning, as did COMPAT, functioning as CCI’s appellate body. COMPAT handled numerous appeals arising out of 221 CCI orders under various provisions of the Act till the financial year 2016-17 (CCI, 2019).

However, the Government of India, through the Finance Act 2017, amended the Act to merge COMPAT with the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).

Legal Provisions related to NCLAT

Section 184 of the Finance Act, 2017 empowers the Central Government to notify rules on qualifications, appointment, terms of office, salaries, allowances, resignation, removal, and service conditions for Chairpersons and Members of specified tribunals. It forms part of Part XIV, Chapter VI, which standardized tribunal governance across multiple statutes

Qualification

Chairperson: The chairperson must be an individual who currently holds or has previously held the position of a Judge in the Supreme Court or served as the Chief Justice of a High Court.

Judicial Member: A Judicial Member must fulfill one of the following conditions: Firstly, he should currently hold or have previously held the position of a Judge in a High Court. Secondly, he must have served as a Judicial Member of the National Company Law Tribunal for a minimum of five years. Alternatively, he should have been an advocate for at least ten years, possessing substantial experience in litigation concerning company affairs before the National Company Law Tribunal, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, High Court, or Supreme Court.

Technical Member: A Technical Member is eligible to be appointed as a member of NCLAT if he demonstrates proven ability, integrity, and standing, along with specialised knowledge and professional experience spanning at least twenty-five years in fields such as law, industrial finance, industrial management, administration, industrial reconstruction, investment, accountancy, or any other relevant area beneficial to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal.

Appointment of members

The appointment of members shall be done by the Central Government on the recommendation by a Search cum Selection Committee given under the Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal and other Authorities (Qualifications, Experience and other Conditions of Service of Members) Rules, 2020. The Search-Cum-Selection Committee responsible for appointing individuals to the positions of Chairperson, Judicial Member, and Technical Member of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal comprises the following members: Firstly, either the Chief Justice of India or a Judge of the Supreme Court nominated by the Chief Justice serves as the chairperson of the committee. Secondly, depending on the specific appointment being made, either the outgoing Chairperson of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal or the current Chairperson of the Tribunal acts as a member. Additionally, the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, and the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Financial Services), serve as members of the committee. Together, these members form the committee tasked with the crucial responsibility of selecting suitable candidates for key positions within the Tribunal.

Term of Office

As per section 414 of the Companies Act, 2013: -

Position	Term Length	Eligibility for Re-appointment	Age Limit
Chairperson	5 years	Yes	Until age 70
Judicial and Technical Members	5 years	Yes	Until age 67

It's important to note that individuals who have not yet reached the age of fifty are not eligible for appointment as Members. Additionally, a Member may maintain their lien with their parent cadre or Ministry or Department, for a period not exceeding one year, while holding office as a Member.

Conditions of Service

As per Section 414 of the Companies Act, the remuneration, allowances, and service conditions for Members of the Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal will be determined as specified by the Central Government from time to time. The current salaries and allowances are given under the Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal and other Authorities (Qualifications, Experience and other Conditions of Service of Members) Rules, 2020 which are as follows -

Position	Monthly Salary
President	Rs. 2,50,000
Judicial Member	Rs. 2,25,000
Technical Member	Rs. 2,25,000
Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal/Industrial Tribunal	Rs. 1,44,200 - Rs. 2,18,200

However, it is explicitly stated that once appointed, the Members' salary, allowances, and service conditions cannot be altered to their disadvantage. This provision serves to safeguard the appointed Members from any detrimental changes in their compensation or terms of service after assuming their roles.

Removal/Resignation of Members

Resignation under Section 416: Members, including the President and Chairperson, can resign from their positions by submitting a written notice to the Central Government. Upon receipt of the resignation notice, they will continue to serve for three months or until a successor is appointed, or their term ends, whichever comes first. This provision ensures continuity until a replacement assumes office.

Removal under Section 417: Members, including the President and Chairperson, may be removed from office by the Central Government under certain circumstances, such as being declared insolvent, convicted of a morally reprehensible offense, or becoming physically or mentally unfit to perform duties. Additionally, removal can occur if they develop financial interests that could adversely affect their role or misuse their position to harm public interest. However, they cannot be removed without a fair hearing. Furthermore, removal can only happen on grounds of proven misbehavior or incapacity after an inquiry conducted by a Judge of the Supreme Court nominated by the Chief Justice of India. During this process, the accused Member is informed of the charges and given a chance to defend themselves. The Central Government, with the Chief Justice of India's agreement, may suspend the Member until the inquiry is concluded. The procedure for such inquiries is regulated by rules established in consultation with the Supreme Court.

Jurisdiction

Subject-Matter Jurisdiction

NCLAT has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over:

Appeals against orders passed by the NCLT under the Companies Act, 2013, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and appeals against the orders of the CCI under the Competition Act, 2002. Matters related to corporate insolvency, liquidation, and winding up of companies.

Appeals from NCLT

Section 421 of the Companies Act allows for appeal against the order of NCLT. However, no appeal can be made if the decision was reached with the agreement of all parties involved. Appeals must be lodged within forty-five days from the date the NCLT's decision is communicated to the aggrieved person, following the prescribed format and accompanied by applicable fees. However, the Appellate Tribunal may consider appeals filed after this period but within an additional forty-five days if it is convinced that the delay was due to justifiable reasons. Upon receiving an appeal, the Appellate Tribunal will grant both parties an opportunity to present their case and will then issue appropriate orders, which may include confirming, modifying, or overturning the original decision. Copies of all orders made by the Appellate Tribunal will be forwarded to the NCLT and the concerned parties.

Appeals of IBC Matters

Section 61 of IBC: Notwithstanding any provisions in the Companies Act of 2013, individuals aggrieved by an order issued by the Adjudicating Authority under this section have the option to appeal to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. Such appeals must be filed within thirty days before the Appellate Tribunal, with the possibility of an extension granted by the Tribunal for up to fifteen days if sufficient cause is demonstrated. Appeals against orders approving resolution plans under section 31 can be made on grounds including contravention of existing laws, material irregularities during the resolution process, failure to address debts owed to operational creditors as specified by the Board, neglecting to prioritize repayment of insolvency resolution process costs, or non-compliance with other criteria set by the Board. Similarly, appeals against liquidation orders under section 33 can be filed on grounds of material irregularities or fraud related to the liquidation order.

Appeal from CCI orders

In 2017, the Government of India amended the Act through the Finance Act, 2017 merging COMPAT with the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). NCLAT became the appellate authority for competition law in India after this merger. The Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) stands transferred to the NCLAT, meaning that the NCLAT is designated to be the Appellate Tribunal for the purposes of the Competition Act, 2002. Consequently, the NCLAT is empowered to hear and dispose of appeals against directions, decisions, or orders issued by the Competition Commission under numerous sections of the Competition Act, 2002 (including sections 26(2), 26(6), 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 38, 39, 43, 43A, 44, 45, or 46), and also to adjudicate on claims for compensation arising from findings of the Commission or the NCLAT's own orders, and to pass recovery orders under section 53N of the Competition Act. Furthermore, the original mandate of the NCLAT to hear appeals against orders of the Tribunal under the Companies Act is broadened to specifically include appeals against "any direction, decision or order referred to in section 53N of the Competition Act, 2002".

The following outlines the process of filing an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 53B of the Competition Act, 2002:

1. Eligibility to Appeal: The Central Government, State Government, local authority, enterprise, or any person who is aggrieved by a direction, decision, or order specified in clause (a) of section 53A has the right to appeal to the Appellate Tribunal.

2. Timeframe for Filing an Appeal: Every appeal under subsection (1) must be filed within sixty days from the date on which a copy of the direction, decision, or order made by the Commission is received by the concerned entity or individual. The appeal should be in a prescribed form and accompanied by a specified fee. However, the Appellate Tribunal may entertain an appeal after sixty days if it is satisfied that there was a valid reason for not filing it within that timeframe.

3. Adjudication by Appellate Tribunal: Upon receiving an appeal, the Appellate Tribunal has the authority to pass orders, after providing the parties involved with an opportunity to be heard. The orders may involve confirming, modifying, or setting aside the direction, decision, or order that is being appealed against.

4. Notification of Orders: The Appellate Tribunal is required to send a copy of every order it makes to the Commission and the parties involved in the appeal.

5. Timely Resolution: The Appellate Tribunal is instructed to handle appeals as expeditiously as possible. It should make efforts to dispose of the appeal within six months from the date of its receipt.

Territorial Jurisdiction

NCLAT operates through two benches:

Principal Bench, New Delhi: Has jurisdiction over all states and union territories except those specifically assigned to the Chennai Bench.

Chennai Bench: Has jurisdiction over the states of Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and the union territories of Lakshadweep and Puducherry. Chennai Bench was established through a circular issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs in order to deal with the heavy burden of cases.

For appeals, the territorial jurisdiction is determined by the location of the NCLT bench whose order is being appealed. The appellant must file the appeal before the NCLAT bench that covers the territory of the NCLT bench whose order is challenged.

Power and Procedure

Section 424 outlines the procedural aspects and powers of the Appellate Tribunal in the context of their functions under the specified Act. Here's a breakdown:

1. Procedure Not Bound by Civil Procedure Code: The Appellate Tribunal is not obligated to follow the procedure laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 while handling proceedings or appeals. Instead, they are directed to adhere to the principles of natural justice. However, they have the authority to regulate their procedure, subject to the provisions of the specified Act and any rules made thereunder.

2. Powers Comparable to Civil Court: The Appellate Tribunal is endowed with powers equivalent to those vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, specifically when dealing with matters such as summoning and examining witnesses, requiring document production, receiving evidence on affidavits, requisitioning public records, issuing commissions, and other related functions.

3. Enforcement of Orders: Orders made by the Appellate Tribunal can be enforced in the same manner as a decree issued by a court in a pending suit. They have the authority to send orders for execution to a court within the local jurisdiction of the registered office of a company (in the case of an order against a company) or the residence, business location, or workplace of the individual concerned (in the case of an order against another person).

4. Judicial Proceedings: All proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal are deemed to be judicial proceedings under specified sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, treating these tribunals as civil courts for certain legal purposes.

5. Contempt of Court: Section 425 specifies that the Appellate Tribunal is vested with jurisdiction, powers, and authority equivalent to that of a High Court concerning contempt of themselves. In exercising these powers, they are entitled to utilize the provisions outlined in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (70 of 1971), with certain modifications: The reference in the Contempt of Courts Act to a High Court is to be construed as including a reference to the Appellate Tribunal. The reference to the Advocate-General in section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act shall be interpreted as a reference to the Law Officers specified by the Central Government for this purpose.

Provision for Appeal

Section 423 outlines the process for filing an appeal to the Supreme Court for individuals who are dissatisfied with an order from the Appellate Tribunal:

1. Eligibility to Appeal: Any person who is aggrieved by an order of the Appellate Tribunal has the right to file an appeal to the Supreme Court.

2. Timeframe for Filing an Appeal: The appeal must be filed within sixty days from the date of receiving the order of the Appellate Tribunal. This is the initial prescribed period for filing an appeal.

3. Extension of Time: The Supreme Court may consider extending the period for filing an appeal if it is satisfied that the appellant had a valid reason, or "sufficient cause," preventing them from submitting the appeal within the initial sixty-day period. If allowed, the further period for filing the appeal shall not exceed sixty days.

In summary, any person aggrieved by an order of the Appellate Tribunal has a total of up to 120 days (60 initial days plus an additional 60 days, if granted) to file an appeal to the Supreme Court on any question of law arising out of the Appellate Tribunal's order.

As defined in Official Government Reports

Eradi Committee Report, 2000

The Eradi Committee, formed in 2001, laid the groundwork for significant changes in India's corporate legal framework. The committee, led by Justice V. Balakrishna Eradi, recommended the establishment of a dedicated appellate tribunal to streamline corporate dispute resolution.

J.J. Irani Committee Report on Company Law, 2005

The Expert Committee welcomed the move to establish NCLAT, which was conceived through the Companies (Second Amendment) Act, 2002, as it is intended to serve as the specialised Appellate Body to NCLT. The Committee viewed the constitution of the NCLT and NCLAT as a major initiative necessary for the reform of the insolvency system and for providing a single forum with expertise to deal with corporate issues in a speedy manner. However, at the time of the report (May 2005), the process for establishing the NCLT/NCLAT was not complete, as it was facing legal challenges, and certain legal issues needed to be resolved before these institutions could be set up. The Committee expressed the hope that this process would be speedily concluded so that the specialised forum could be available for the informed consideration of corporate issues. The NCLAT itself is envisaged to be headed by a person who has been the Chief Justice of a High Court or a Justice of the Supreme Court.

Joint Committee of Parliament on the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code Bill, 2015 (Lok Sabha)

The report of the Joint Committee on the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2015, highlights the role of the NCLAT as the Appellate Authority for individuals aggrieved by orders of the NCLT related to corporate insolvency resolution and liquidation. Appeals must be filed within thirty days, although the NCLAT may permit a further filing period of up to fifteen days if sufficient cause for delay is shown. Furthermore, any person dissatisfied with an NCLAT order may appeal to the Supreme Court on a question of law within forty-five days. Institutionally, the groundwork for NCLAT’s establishment followed a Supreme Court judgment in May 2015, and it is being established in New Delhi. Recognising the impending workload from corporate insolvency cases, the Committee urged the government to work in a "mission mode" to expedite the setting up of adequate Benches of this appellate authority, and stressed the urgency of providing and upgrading IT infrastructure and initiating capacity building (including training for officials) at the NCLAT to ensure the fast-tracking of resolution processes. Finally, the report clarifies that the NCLAT, along with the NCLT, holds exclusive jurisdiction over matters within the Code, meaning no civil court or authority shall have jurisdiction over such matters or grant injunctions against actions taken by these tribunals.

The report of the Bankruptcy Law Reforms Committee Volume I: Rationale and Design, 2015

The NCLAT, or National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, is an institution designated to serve as a critical appellate authority within the proposed insolvency framework. The Committee recommends continuing the existing institutional arrangement where the NCLAT is vested with appellate jurisdiction over the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), which handles the winding up and liquidation of companies under the Companies Act, 2013, and the dissolution and winding up of limited liability partnerships under the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008. Crucially, the Committee also concluded that the NCLAT should have appellate jurisdiction over orders passed by the insolvency regulator, referred to as the Board. This includes hearing appeals against orders concerning regulated entities, such as information utilities or insolvency professionals. Appeals from an order of the insolvency regulator must be filed before the NCLAT within forty-five days, with a possible extension of up to fifteen days if the NCLAT is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for the delay. Following the NCLAT’s decision, an aggrieved party is granted a statutory right to appeal to the Supreme Court.

As defined in Case Laws

The evolution of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in India is intricately tied to both legislative changes and key judicial decisions. Before the formal establishment of the NCLAT in 2003, various judicial decisions emphasised the need for specialised forums to address company law matters. The Indian judiciary recognized the intricate nature of corporate disputes, leading to calls for a dedicated appellate body.

The necessity for a specialised tribunal was advocated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of S.P. Sampath Kumar v. Union of India. In this judgment, the Hon'ble Court endorsed the theory of alternative institutional mechanisms, emphasising that since independence, the country's population has been steadily rising, consequently leading to a surge in disputes brought before the courts. This surge places a strain on the courts, necessitating the establishment of specialised tribunals.

After the cases of R Gandhi v. Union of India and Madras Bar Association v. Union of India where the constitutionality of NCLAT/NCLT was upheld, the NCLAT formally commenced its operations on June 1, 2016, as a specialised appellate tribunal. Its role expanded to include hearing appeals related to insolvency matters, further emphasising its significance in the evolving corporate legal landscape.

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) was a quasi-judicial entity in India created to adjudicate appeals against decisions made by the NCLT (National Company Law Tribunal) and other regulatory bodies under the Companies Act, 2013. It plays a pivotal role in resolving disputes related to corporate and insolvency issues. Section 410 of the Companies Act, 2013, mandated the establishment of the NCLAT, which began its operations on June 1, 2016.

Appearance in Official Databases

Appearance in Judicial Databases

Annual Report (2023-2024) - Competition Commission of India

The annual report of the CCI contains a dedicated discussion and statistical overview of matters relating to NCLAT, particularly insofar as NCLAT functions as the appellate authority over CCI orders. From such an annual report, one can generally retrieve consolidated data on the number of appeals filed before NCLAT against CCI orders during the relevant financial year, along with the number of appeals disposed of and those remaining pending at the end of the year. This gives a clear picture of the appellate caseload and disposal trends.

Further, some reports touch upon efficiency-related indicators, such as pendency levels or disposal rates, offering insight into the timeliness of appellate review. In certain cases, references may also be made to compensation claims or other consequential proceedings that reached NCLAT following CCI orders. Overall, the NCLAT-related content in the annual report serves as a consolidated snapshot of appellate oversight over CCI’s work, combining statistical data with high-level qualitative analysis of appellate trends and outcomes.

The annual report usually includes a brief narrative summary of outcomes at the NCLAT level, indicating whether CCI orders were upheld, modified, set aside, or remanded back to the Commission. While it does not reproduce detailed judgments, it may highlight significant or precedent-setting NCLAT decisions that had an impact on competition law enforcement, interpretation of statutory provisions, or procedural aspects of CCI investigations.

Appeals Data (General Trends and FY 2023-24)

In addition to raw numbers, the report often provides year-on-year comparative figures showing trends in appeals received, disposed, or pending, which helps assess whether litigation against CCI decisions is increasing or declining over time. The data may also be categorised by the nature of proceedings, such as appeals against final orders, interim orders, or compensation applications arising from findings of contravention under the Competition Act, 2002.

Orders Appealed Against (CCI Final Orders)

The incidence of CCI Final Orders appealed against, spanning the last three years, is:

Final Orders of the Commission appealed against Page 19

Disposal of Appeals by NCLAT (Orders Passed by NCLAT)

NCLAT might pass more than one Order in the disposal of appeals against a single Order of the Commission.

Disposal of appeals by NCLAT Page 19

Disposal of Appeals by NCLAT (FY 2023-24 Specifics)

During 2023-24, the NCLAT disposed of 40 appeals against 15 Orders of the Commission till March 31, 2024.

Receipt and disposal of appeals by NCLAT during 2023–24 Page 20

Section-wise Disposal of Appeals by NCLAT (2023-24)

The NCLAT disposed of appeals concerning 15 CCI Orders categorised by the relevant section of the original CCI Order:

Orders Passed u/s	No. of Orders
Section 27	05
Section 26(2)	06
Section 26(6)	-
Section 31(1)	01
Section 33	-
Section 43	-
Section 43A	01
Other Orders	02
Total	15

Annual Report (2024-2025) - Ministry of Corporate Affairs

Number of Cases as on November 20, 2024

Member Strength and Composition

• Sanctioned/Actual Strength: The current sanctioned and actual strength is twelve members.

Composition of NCLAT (as on November 30, 2024)

• Composition: The members are divided equally: six judicial members and six technical members.The current NCLAT is headed by Ashok Bhushan, a retired Supreme Court judge, who serves as the Chairman of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal.

• Judicial Leadership: The judicial members include a former Supreme Court judge (who serves as the Chairperson), one former Chief Justice of a High Court, and two former High Court judges.

• Technical Members: Technical members include three former IAS officers, two former Revenue Service Officers, and one former Railway Accounts Service officer. They generally possess diverse educational backgrounds such as engineering, science, economics, and management.

Appearance in Non-Official Databases

The State of Tribunals Report, DAKSH

Performance and Case Load Statistics

Overall Pendency and Filing (Up to November 30, 2024)

Total Appeals Filed (Cumulative): 13,120 (New Delhi) + 2,394 (Chennai) = 15,514.

Total Appeals Disposed of: 10,605 (New Delhi) + 1595 (Chennai) = 12,200.

Total Appeals Pending: 2,515 (New Delhi) + 799 (Chennai) = 3,314.

Appeals Filed Under	Appeals Received (Up to 30.11.2024)	Appeals Pending (as on 30.11.2024)	Appeals Disposed (as on 30.11.2024)
IBC, 2016 (Delhi)	10,247	2,515	8,372
Companies Act, 2013 (Delhi)	2,406	471	1,935
Competition Act, 2002 (Delhi)	448	157	291
Compensation Cases (Competition Act 2002)	12	9	3
MRTP Cases	7	3	4
Total Delhi Bench	13,120	2,515	10,605
IBC, 2016 (Chennai)	1,866	516	1,305
Companies Act, 2013 (Chennai)	528	238	290
Total Chennai Bench	2,394	799	1,595

Note: Cases under the Competition Act, Compensation Cases, and MRTP Cases are decided exclusively by the New Delhi Bench.

Case Distribution Percentages (Up to November 30, 2024)

Bench	IBC, 2016	Companies Act, 2013	Competition Act, 2002/Other
New Delhi Bench	78.1%	18.3%	3.5%
Chennai Bench	77.9%	22.1%	N/A

Performance in Competition Law Adjudication

The NCLAT's performance as the appellate body for competition law is significantly lower than its predecessor, COMPAT.

Tribunal	Period Covered	Average Case Clearance Rate (CCR)
COMPAT	8 years (FY 2009-10 to FY 2016-17)	47.4%
NCLAT	7 years (FY 2017-18 onwards)	17.8%
NCLAT (excluding COVID years)	5 years	25.44%
NCLAT Peak Disposal	FY 2022-23	160 competition appeals disposed of in a single year.

The backlog of competition appeals has consistently remained over 150 every year since 2017-18 (except the first year), peaking at 285 pending cases in FY 2021-22.

Current Staff Strength and Composition

Staff Strength (as of December 13, 2024)

Type of Staff	Number of Staff	Percentage
Staff on Contract	197	84.9%
Permanent Staff	26	11.2%
Staff on Deputation	9	3.9%
Total Staff	232

Expertise Deficit (Competition Law): No technical member specialising in competition law has been appointed, leading to shortcomings in the depth of analysis for complex competition jurisprudence. The tribunal shows a heavy reliance on contractual staff.

Key Powers of Personnel

Personnel	Powers
Chairperson	Decides the working calendar of NCLAT; can delegate powers to a Deputy Registrar; authorizes listing of urgent matters in exceptional cases; can authorize a member to pronounce an order on behalf of an unavailable member; empowered to issue directions for removal of difficulties when rules are silent.
Registrar	Responsible for registration of appeals, petitions, or applications, and issuing fresh summons/notices; maintains custody of NCLAT records; transmits NCLAT orders to Civil Courts for execution; can decline to register an appeal if defects are not rectified in time; allows inspection of records only upon order.

Accessibility Concern

The limited number of benches creates significant challenges for litigants located far from these two cities, increasing costs and travel time.

Tech Transformation

Digitisation Checklist

Main website:

The official website for NCLAT is https://nclat.nic.in/. This website provides information related to the jurisdiction, functions, members, and recent judgments of the NCLAT. It also provides access to the NCLAT's cause lists, case status, orders, and other relevant documents. The website enumerates the rules and laws governing the NCLAT. The notices, circulars and tenders related to NCLAT are also provided on this website.

E-filing:

There is an option to file appeal cases online at the website itself. On the home page, there is an e-filing portal link below. By clicking on it, one will be redirected to the other page which is the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (nclat.gov.in). To file cases, first need to register ones' account on the NCLAT website. All the parties involved in a case who have registered themselves on https://efiling.nclat.gov.in get an SMS/Email with a listing date after cause lists are finalised. After successfully registering an account, one can file appeals of different kinds. How to file an appeal is mentioned in detail in the User Manual. It is important to note that Users need to submit a copy of the appeal/application/petition and all required documents (to be submitted as part of the appeal/petition/application) at the NCLAT counter. In case of online payment Bharatkosh receipt or demand draft in case of offline payment has to be submitted along with an appeal/application/petition. If there are any questions one can seek answers in FAQs.

Cause list:

The website releases E- Cause List on a day-to-day basis. The E-Cause List can be searched by using description, court number and dates of the cases being proceeded. By going on the Cause List a search bar for finding a particular cause list and a table for daily cause list appear. It is given in the image below.

Daily Cause List

After clicking on the desired cause list Download Button, a pdf of the cause list will appear. Like the image given below.

PDF of a Cause List

As per the image, the cause list contains the subject matter, parties involved, name of counsel, and case number. It would be better if links for case orders/judgments were given in the case number itself. The cause list also contains a Video Conferencing link to attend the hearings.

Case Status:

By navigating to the "Case Status" tab on the website, users can conveniently access the current status of any case pending before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in India. This feature facilitates easy tracking of case progress and enables stakeholders to stay informed about the latest developments.

Upon clicking the "Case Status" tab, users are presented with a user-friendly interface where they can input specific details to retrieve relevant case information. They have the flexibility to search for case status using various parameters such as case number, filing number, case type, party name, or advocate name. This comprehensive search functionality ensures that users can locate the desired case quickly and efficiently.

Once the search parameters are entered, the system retrieves the corresponding case details, including the current status, hearing dates, orders passed, and any other pertinent information related to the case. This allows users to stay updated on the progress of their cases or those they are interested in, without the need for physical visits to the tribunal or lengthy administrative procedures

Case Status

Orders:

Upon selecting the "Orders" tab on the website, users gain access to a repository of orders issued by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in India. This feature serves as a valuable resource for stakeholders seeking to review and reference specific orders related to cases adjudicated by the tribunal.

The interface allows users to search for orders based on various criteria, enhancing accessibility and ease of use. Users can input specific details such as the case number, filing number, order date, or enter free text to conduct a comprehensive search. This versatile search functionality accommodates different user preferences and requirements, ensuring that users can quickly locate the desired orders.

It's noteworthy that Image 1 pertains specifically to orders issued after May 31, 2023, providing users with access to the most recent adjudicatory decisions. However, for orders issued prior to this date, users can navigate to a separate page dedicated to accessing historical orders. This division ensures that users can access orders from both recent and earlier periods, facilitating comprehensive research and analysis.

Upon selecting the desired criteria and conducting the search, the system retrieves the relevant orders, presenting them in a structured format for easy review. Users can view details such as the order date, case details, parties involved, and the text of the order itself. This comprehensive presentation enables users to efficiently review and analyze the content of the orders as per their requirements.

Daily Orders at NCLAT

Judgments:

Upon navigating to the "Judgments" tab on the website, users gain access to an extensive repository of judgments delivered by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in India. This feature serves as a valuable resource for legal professionals, litigants, and other stakeholders seeking comprehensive information about past case rulings.

By inputting specific details such as case number, filing number, free text, or judgment date into the designated search fields, users can efficiently locate judgments relevant to their query. This versatile search functionality accommodates various search preferences and enables users to pinpoint specific judgments with ease.

It's noteworthy that Image 1, accessible through the "Judgments" tab, exclusively displays judgments delivered after 31 May 2021. For users interested in accessing judgments rendered before this date, there is a separate page dedicated to retrieving prior judgments. This segmentation ensures that users can navigate the database efficiently and retrieve judgments from their preferred timeframe without unnecessary clutter.

Upon conducting the search, the system retrieves the desired judgments along with relevant details such as case particulars, judgment date, and a brief summary. Users can then review the full text of the judgment, providing comprehensive insights into the tribunal's legal reasoning, findings, and conclusions.

Judgments at NCLAT

Video Conferencing/Virtual Hearing:

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the need for social distancing measures, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has issued an SOP for advocates and parties involved in cases to participate in hearings virtually via video conferencing (VC). This initiative aims to ensure the continuity of legal proceedings while prioritizing the safety and well-being of all stakeholders.

Detailed instructions for availing virtual hearings are provided in a circular issued by the NCLAT. This circular outlines the procedures and protocols to be followed by advocates and parties wishing to attend hearings remotely. It includes guidance on accessing the VC platform, technical requirements, and adherence to decorum during virtual proceedings.

Importantly, the circular emphasises the integration of virtual hearing options directly into the cause list, streamlining the process for advocates and parties to access the VC link corresponding to their case. This integration enhances convenience and accessibility, enabling seamless transition to virtual hearings.

The decision to implement virtual hearings aligns with the standard operating procedures (SOP) issued by the NCLAT in response to the COVID-19 spread. By leveraging technology to facilitate remote participation, the NCLAT demonstrates its commitment to ensuring the efficient and effective administration of justice during challenging circumstances.

Disposal Report:

The NCLAT does not appear to officially release a dedicated, standalone disposal report or compilation of case statistics (such as the number of cases disposed or pending) in the form of an annual or periodical report on its official website.

Research that engages with NCLAT

COMPAT to NCLAT: Aftermath of the Merger, Nikita Sultania and Piyush Jain

This paper analyses the 2017 merger of the Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) with the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) under the Finance Act, highlighting how the reform—intended to streamline tribunal structures—has instead led to procedural ambiguity, increased pendency, and a dilution of technical expertise in competition law adjudication. Drawing on RTI data showing low disposal rates of competition appeals and differences between the procedural frameworks of the Companies Act and the Competition Act, the authors argue that the merger has overburdened NCLAT without achieving the objective of speedier or more expert justice. They recommend amending NCLAT’s composition rules to include competition law specialists, creating dedicated benches for such matters, harmonising procedural timelines, and reconsidering whether a separate competition appellate forum is still warranted to ensure effective, domain-specific adjudication.

National Company Law Tribunal & National Company Law Appellate Tribunal have the Ability to Recall Orders: Legal Showcase, Monika Jain

The paper explores the scope and powers of the NCLT and NCLAT under the Companies Act, 2013, particularly their ability to recall or review their orders in corporate law and insolvency proceedings. It examines constitutional and statutory underpinnings of both tribunals, traces key decisions of the Supreme Court and High Courts on their recall jurisdiction, and analyses how the tribunals’ composition and framework influence corporate-litigation outcomes. The author further considers the practical role of authorised representatives, the interplay of corporate insolvency resolution, moratorium declarations, undervalued transactions and defaults, and how the tribunals’ recall powers impact efficiency and fairness of corporate adjudication.

Whether NCLT, NCLAT, DRT and DRAT Have the Power to Punish for Contempt, Aniruddha Singh & Shrishti Gupta

The article critically examines whether quasi-judicial bodies like the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) and Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT) possess the statutory or inherent power to punish for contempt. The authors analyse the constitutional foundation of contempt powers under Articles 129 and 215, noting that such authority is reserved for courts of record unless specifically granted by legislation. They review the Companies Act, 2013 and the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, observing that while these statutes confer limited procedural powers, they do not explicitly endow contempt jurisdiction. Through examination of relevant judgments—including Alchemist Asset Reconstruction Co. v. Hotel Gaudavan Pvt. Ltd.—the article concludes that tribunals must rely on High Courts to enforce compliance and cannot independently exercise contempt powers, reaffirming the principle that quasi-judicial bodies remain subordinate to the supervisory jurisdiction of constitutional courts.

Inherent Powers of NCLT/NCLAT vis-à-vis IBC, Kahnav Mahajan

In this paper, Mahajan explores the extent to which the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) possess “inherent powers” under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India which suggested that the tribunals may invoke inherent jurisdiction in certain contexts. The author assesses jurisprudence on inherent powers of courts and tribunals, analyses statutory provisions of the IBC and related enactments, and argues that while NCLT/NCLAT’s power to act beyond explicit statutory mandate may be inferred in exceptional circumstances, a clear and consistent footing for such powers is lacking, raising concerns about legal certainty and tribunal competence.

Analysis of NCLAT’s Functioning as Competition Law Appellate Tribunal, N. S. Suhag

In the paper, the author critically examines the operational efficacy, structural design and appellate outcomes of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in its role as the appellate body under the Competition Commission of India (CCI) regime. The paper highlights key concerns including persistent case-backlogs, delays in disposal of appeals, lack of specialised benches for competition matters, and limitations arising from the tribunal’s composition and procedural framework. Suhag draws attention to how these practical challenges undermine the goals of expeditious and expert adjudication in India’s competition law architecture, and suggests reforms to bolster NCLAT’s capacity and domain-specific expertise.

A Comparative Analysis of BIFR and NCLT, NCLAT in Tribunalisation in India, Aditi Shreenivas Prabhune

The author traces the evolution of India’s corporate tribunal system from the Board for Industrial & Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). Through a comparative framework, the study examines the legal basis, jurisdictional mandate and effectiveness of these tribunals, analysing their role in handling corporate restructuring, insolvency, winding-up and governance issues. The paper finds that while the consolidation under NCLT/NCLAT was intended to streamline adjudication and reduce multiplicity of forums (transferring many functions previously under BIFR and High Courts), significant challenges remain — including backlog, specialised expertise, infrastructure and procedural clarity. The author thus recommends enhanced bench strength, clearly demarcated benches for insolvency vs corporate governance, infrastructure upgrades and procedural harmonisation.

Empowering NCLAT: The Review Revolution, Kavimayil N V

In this article, Kavimayil N V examines the powers of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in relation to review and recall of its own decisions under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) and the Companies Act, 2013. The author traces the statutory provisions—such as Section 420(2) of the Companies Act which allows the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to amend an order for “mistake apparent from the record” within two years—alongside Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules (2016) on inherent powers, to argue that while review as understood in conventional court processes is not explicitly granted to NCLAT/NCLT, a form of recall is being recognised in practice. The paper discusses landmark decisions including Union Bank of India vs Financial Creditors of M/s Amtek Auto Ltd & Ors and Union Bank of India (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) vs Dinkar T. Venkatasubramanian & Ors, showing that NCLAT has held that it has no express power to review itself but may recall earlier orders in exceptional cases. The author argues that formally recognising review power for NCLAT could enhance efficiency and consistency, but cautions that such reform must be carefully framed to avoid undermining finality and increasing delays.

International Experiences

In countries like the United States, United Kingdom, and Singapore, specialized corporate and insolvency tribunals or courts operate to expedite resolution of company law disputes, similar to NCLT and NCLAT in India. For example, the US Bankruptcy Courts handle insolvency appeals separately from general civil courts, and have dedicated procedural rules tailored to insolvency resolution. Appellate bodies review decisions on both factual and legal grounds, ensuring speedy judicial monitoring while maintaining due process. These systems often separate fact-finding courts from appellate tribunals to enhance efficiency.

United States

The US operates specialized Bankruptcy Courts for insolvency cases, with distinct appellate procedure through District Courts and Bankruptcy Appellate Panels. These courts handle appeals on both factual and legal grounds, ensuring speedy dispute resolution distinct from general civil courts. Extensive data on insolvency cases, filings, case duration, and outcomes is collected and published annually by the US Courts, enabling transparency and facilitating policy assessment. The US model highlights the value of dedicated judges with expertise in bankruptcy law and robust data systems for judicial monitoring and efficiency improvement. With regards to antitrust cases, the U.S. antitrust enforcement system is dual-agency: the FTC (civil enforcement and consumer protection) and DOJ Antitrust Division (criminal & civil antitrust).

United Kingdom

Company law and insolvency appeals in the UK are handled by specialized divisions within the High Court and by the Court of Appeal in London. The UK regime separates fact-finding from appellate review, emphasizing judicial specialization and procedural strictness to minimize delays. Insolvency data collection includes detailed statistics on case types, durations, and bankruptcy rates managed by the Insolvency Service, supporting responsive legislative reforms. The UK’s experience underscores the importance of procedural clarity and data-driven reforms for maintaining trust in corporate dispute resolution.

Singapore

Singapore’s insolvency appellate process involves the High Court and the Court of Appeal, with well-defined procedures to streamline appeals on insolvency and company law matters. The Singaporean judiciary invests in technical and legal expertise and mandates timely disposal of cases to promote investor confidence. Data on insolvency and appeal statistics is systematically collected and made publicly accessible, aiding transparency and policy targeting. Singapore’s experience illustrates how smaller jurisdictions can build efficient, trustworthy tribunals by balancing legal rigor with practical case management.

Data Challenges

• Limited and fragmented publicly-available case-level data: Although NCLAT publishes orders and some case-metadata, there is no comprehensive, standardized dataset covering all appeals filed, disposed, time-taken, bench composition, outcome trends, etc. For example, the Open Government Data (OGD) Platform lists “Year-wise Number of Appeals Filed in Hon’ble NCLAT” but only limited metrics are available. The absence of uniform structured data makes longitudinal analysis (e.g., pendency, disposal rates, bench workloads) difficult.
• Inconsistent or non-granular metadata: Key variables such as nature of appeal (IBC vs. Companies Act vs. Competition Act), parties involved, complexity indicators, hearing count, and outcome type (e.g., full disposal vs. remand) are often missing or inconsistently captured. Without such granularity, comparative studies (across subject-matter, year, region) remain challenging.
• Lack of digitisation and machine-readable formats: Many orders are published as scanned PDFs or non-tagged formats, making automated extraction and coding of variables error-prone. This complicates large-scale quantitative work (e.g., regression modelling) on NCLAT data.
• Delay and backlog in data updates: Data lags undermine real-time or near-real-time analysis of pendency, case inflow/outflow, or performance metrics. Without timely updates, tracking trends or the impact of law-reforms (e.g., amendments to Companies Act, 2013 or Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016) becomes harder.
• Need for Special Benches: Establishing a specialized bench within NCLAT dedicated exclusively to handling competition law appeals is recommended. The same recommendation can be used to establish a specialized Bench for IBC matters.
• Lack of proper Technical Members: Currently, the NCLAT bench lacks a technical member with expertise or background in competition law and IBC matters. Therefore, it is suggested to reintroduce qualifications for technical members appointed to the competition law bench, similar to those outlined in Section 53D for COMPAT but omitted by the Finance Act of 2017. This is crucial for ensuring that the NCLAT bench comprises experts capable of comprehending and adjudicating competition law matters.
• Expert Assistance: Recognizing the complexity of competition law issues, the NCLAT should seek expert assistance, especially in areas such as the nuanced economic aspects of competition law cases and the technological dimensions of e-commerce cases. An amendment to Section 35 of the Competition Act, as recommended by the Competition Law Review Committee (CLRC), could allow the engagement of experts in economics, commerce, international trade, or other relevant disciplines during NCLAT proceedings.
• Vacancy of Judges: The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), has been grappling with resource challenges, particularly in terms of vacant judicial positions and inadequate infrastructure. This scarcity of resources has had a noticeable impact on the efficiency of the virtual adjudication process, which was adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic but has experienced slowdowns. Notably, there has been a prolonged period without the appointment of a regular Chairperson since January 2020. The shortage of members has further exacerbated the situation, with one bench being tasked with handling cases from multiple benches, resulting in a substantial backlog of cases. The challenges were compounded by the effects of the coronavirus pandemic. Justice M M Kumar highlighted the impact of these resource constraints. He mentioned that the absence of a regular Chairperson post-January 2020, coupled with a depleted strength of members, led to significant challenges in case management. The situation was worsened by the pandemic, which further hampered the tribunal's ability to efficiently address the growing number of cases.
• Slower Disposal of IBC Cases: According to the 2021 data from the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI), a substantial 73% of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) cases as of September 30 2021 have exceeded the stipulated 270-day period, representing a significant increase beyond the maximum permissible duration. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) was enacted to facilitate a time-bound and market-linked resolution of distressed assets, with the IBBI playing a crucial role in its implementation. However, the extended duration of CIRP cases, as highlighted by the data, indicates challenges in adhering to the prescribed timelines. The complexity of larger cases is cited as a primary reason for the prolonged resolution process, with numerous issues arising during insolvency proceedings. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code has undergone multiple amendments to address evolving challenges, reflecting the continuous effort to refine and improve the law. Despite being in existence for five years, the IBC is considered a relatively new legislation, and practical difficulties persist. In specific cases, such as those involving home buyers, the resolution process is further complicated by the involvement of multiple groups with varying concerns. Virender Ganda, the then President of the National Company Law Tribunal and Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) Bar Association, pointed out that the delays can be attributed to the prolonged absence of regulatory heads at the NCLT and NCLAT. Additionally, there had been a shortage of judicial and technical members, and the tribunals operated with understaffed resources during the challenging times of the COVID-19 pandemic. These factors collectively contributed to the delays in the resolution of insolvency cases.

Way Ahead

NCLAT could explore measures to expedite case disposal, such as increased use of technology, additional manpower, and improved case management systems. The government may consider allocating more resources, both human and technological, to NCLAT to address capacity constraints. Regular reviews of the legal framework and training programs for judges and legal professionals can contribute to improved understanding and consistent interpretation of laws. The way ahead must integrate institutional reforms and stakeholder engagement to ensure transparency, usability and accountability. For instance, regular and timely updating of performance statistics (pendency, disposal rates, time-to-hearing) will enable evidence-based management and legislative oversight — yet reports note these are currently lacking in tribunal systems. Equally important is striking the correct balance between transparency and privacy, especially as increasingly large datasets of judicial and quasi-judicial activity become publicly available. Thoughtful guidelines must be adopted to manage personal data, sensitive case material, and open access. Engagement with academic researchers, litigant groups, registry officers and technologists will ensure that the data released is usable, meaningful and capable of driving reform. Taken together, these steps can significantly advance the empirical and policy understanding of NCLAT’s operations, thereby strengthening both institutional performance and public trust.