No Appeal Lies Against Dismissal Of Contempt Plea Without Punishment: NCLAT

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) at Chennai has recently reiterated that an appeal against dismissal of a contempt petition is not maintainable where no punishment has been imposed.

The bench of Judicial Member Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma and Technical Member Jatindranath Swain fater examining the Contempt of Courts Act, observed, “Section 19(1) envisages Appeal against only those orders where a punishment has been inflicted for contempt. In the instant case, no punishment has been awarded.”

The tribunal further clarified the limited role of an applicant in contempt proceedings, observing, “It is a settled principle of law that, an Applicant to the Contempt proceedings is simply an informer to the Tribunal(s) or the Court(s), informing the Court, about the alleged non-compliance of the Order passed by it, and the need to draw a contempt proceedings to inflict punishment for such non-compliance as contemplated under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.In the present case, the tribunal has found that no orders has been deliberately violated and hence, proceeded to dismiss the Contempt Petition by the impugned order of 20.01.2026.”

Venkata Chalam Varanasi, a Bankruptcy Trustee, had earlier obtained directions from the Adjudicating Authority requiring Upender Kumar Agarwal to extend all assistance and cooperation and furnish a statement of financial position under Section 129 of the Code read with Regulation 12 of the IBBI (Bankruptcy Process for Personal Guarantors to Corporate Debtors) Regulations, 2019.

Alleging non-compliance, Varanasi filed a contempt application under Section 425 of the Companies Act, 2013, read with Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, and invoking Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The Adjudicating Authority (NCLT), however, dismissed the contempt application by order dated 20.01.2026.

Aggrieved by the same, Varanasi preferred the present Company Appeal, which was required to be considered in accordance with Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The NCLAT held that the appeal is not maintainable in the absence of any punishment being imposed for contempt. It further added that dismissal of a contempt petition is an exclusive prerogative of the Tribunal, and after filing of the contempt petition, the applicant has no role thereafter.

When there is an order of punishment against the alleged contemnor, it is the contemnor who can file an appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and not the applicant to the contempt application.

Notwithstanding the above, the tribunal observed that it remains the responsibility of the Tribunal to ensure that its orders are complied with so as to attach sanctity and inviolability to its proceedings.