Supreme Court Grants Time As Telsonic, Roop Ultrasonix Explore Settlement Over Rights Issue
Kirit Singhania
29 Jan 2026 2:44 PM IST
The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted additional time to the parties in a dispute between Telsonic Holding AG and Roop Ultrasonix Ltd after they informed the court that they were trying to reach an amicable settlement.
The court was hearing appeals filed by Telsonic Holding AG challenging a National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order that had set aside an earlier ruling of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) Mumbai relating to a rights issue by Roop Ultrasonix.
A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan noted the joint request made by counsel for more time and directed that the matter be listed after four weeks.
“We are informed that parties are trying to reach to some amicable understanding. A joint request has been made for some more time,” the court said.
The appeal arises from an NCLAT judgment dated November 20, 2025, which had allowed appeals filed by Roop Ultrasonix Limited and others against an interim order of the NCLT.
The tribunal had earlier held that the entire process of a rights issue undertaken by Roop Ultrasonix in March 2023 was illegal and vitiated and had directed the company to refund the application money received from shareholders.
The controversy stemmed from objections raised by Telsonic Holding AG, a Switzerland-based shareholder, which alleged that the rights issue was hurriedly carried out to dilute its shareholding and wrest control of the company.Telsonic argued that statutory requirements under company law were violated, particularly those relating to notice periods and dematerialisation of shares.
The appellate tribunal, however, overturned the NCLT's findings. It held that Telsonic had been validly reclassified as a “public shareholder” prior to the rights issue and was no longer a promoter at the relevant time.
It further ruled that Roop Ultrasonix had complied with the Companies Act by issuing an addendum to correct the notice period and that the obligation to dematerialize shares rested with the shareholder concerned.
The NCLAT set aside the NCLT's order, which had set aside the rights issue and directed a refund. The matter will now be listed before the Supreme Court after four weeks.
For Appellants: AOR Ranjan Kumar Pandey with Advocates Rahul Khosla, Pankaj Prakash, Piyush Sharma, Sarang Rastogi, Sahil Nindawat
For Respondents: Advocates Gaurav H. Sethi, Rahul Kapoor, Rahul Pawar, Aditya Giri, AOR