National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Upholds Mediated Consent Terms in Company Dispute Under Companies Act, 1956 -- Appeals by Appellant(s) and Accurate Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Dismissed Due to Failure to Prove Coercion, Undue Influence, and Duress

Sub Category: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: NEW DELHI
  • 13
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal dismissed appeals challenging the National Company Law Tribunal's order that upheld mediated consent terms in a company petition under the Companies Act, 1956 -- The appellants, Sonali Prashant Shinde and Accurate Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., sought to set aside consent terms dated 07.01.2023, alleging they were executed under coercion, undue influence, and duress during mediation -- The Tribunal analyzed the Indian Contract Act, 1972, particularly Sections 10, 14-19, and found the appellants failed to prove coercion as it requires actions forbidden by the Indian Penal Code, 1860 -- Allegations of undue influence were deemed vague without evidence of dominating influence, and duress was not recognized under the Act -- The consent terms were declared valid and binding, as the parties were in equal positions and of sound mind -- The appeals were rejected, affirming the impugned order dated 03.10.2023

Headnote

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, dismissed Company Appeal (AT) Nos. 211 and 212 of 2023, challenging the impugned order dated 03.10.2023 of the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai -- The appeals sought to declare the consent terms dated 07.01.2023 unenforceable and set them aside, alleging coercion, undue influence, and duress during mediation -- The Tribunal held that the appellants failed to prove coercion as defined under Section 15 of the Indian Contract Act, 1972, which requires actions forbidden by the Indian Penal Code, 1860 -- It ruled that allegations of undue influence under Section 16 of the Indian Contract Act, 1972 were vague and unsupported by evidence of dominating will or undue advantage -- Duress was not equated with coercion under the Act and was ruled out due to lack of proof -- The consent terms were upheld as enforceable, binding the parties who were of full age and sound mind in equal positions -- The Tribunal emphasized the presumption of free consent and the burden on the appellants to establish vitiating factors

Issue of Consideration: The Issue of Consideration was whether the consent terms dated 07.01.2023, resulting from mediation proceedings, were vitiated by lack of free consent due to coercion, undue influence, and duress, and thus unenforceable under the Indian Contract Act, 1972

Final Decision

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal dismissed both appeals, upholding the impugned order dated 03.10.2023 -- The consent terms dated 07.01.2023 were declared enforceable and binding on the parties

2024 LawText (NCLAT) (01) 145

Company Appeal (AT) No. 211 of 2023, Company Appeal (AT) No. 212 of 2023, I.A. No. 5257 of 2023

2025-10-15

[Justice Yogesh Khanna] Member (Judicial) [Mr. Ajai Das Mehrotra] Member (Technical)

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Dubey, Mr. Sushil Nimbkar, Ms. Shuchi Singh, Mr. Ujjwal Kumar Dubey, Advocates for Appellants; Mr. Chinmoy Khaladkar, Mr. Anand Shankar Jha, Mr. Sachin Mintri, Mr. Shrenik Gandhi, Mr. Shubhank Sharma, Advocates for Respondents

Sonali Prashant Shinde, Accurate Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.

Vikram Vilasrao Salunke, Vikram Vilasaro Salunke & Anr.

Nature of Litigation: Appeals against the National Company Law Tribunal's order dismissing applications to set aside mediated consent terms in a company petition under the Companies Act, 1956

Remedy Sought

The appellants sought declaration that the consent terms dated 07.01.2023 be held unenforceable and set aside due to alleged coercion, undue influence, and duress

Filing Reason

Challenging the impugned order dated 03.10.2023 that rejected their applications and disposed of the Transfer Company Petition No. 56/2014

Previous Decisions

The National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, passed an order dated 03.10.2023 rejecting IA No. 143/2023 and IA No. 147/2023, and disposing of Transfer Company Petition No. 56/2014

Issues

Whether the consent terms dated 07.01.2023 were vitiated by lack of free consent due to coercion, undue influence, and duress under the Indian Contract Act, 1972 Whether the mediated consent terms are enforceable and binding on the parties

Submissions/Arguments

The appellants argued that the mediation process was vitiated as there was no free consent due to duress, coercion, and undue influence The respondents did not file replies to the applications, implying reliance on the consent terms as valid

Ratio Decidendi

Free consent under Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1972 is presumed unless proven otherwise -- Coercion requires actions forbidden by the Indian Penal Code, 1860 under Section 15, which was not established -- Undue influence under Section 16 requires proof of dominating will and undue advantage, which was lacking due to vague allegations -- Duress is not a recognized vitiating factor under the Act and was ruled out -- Parties in equal positions of full age and sound mind are bound by their consent terms

Judgment Excerpts

"To our mind, the main thrust of argument of learned Counsel for the Applicants is that the whole process of mediation was vitiated as there was no free consent and the consent was marred by duress, coercion and undue influence." -- Para 9 "Under Section 10 of the Contract Act, for the validity of a contract, it is not only necessary that there should be a consent, but also the consent must be free." -- Para 10 "Since, duress has also been alleged by the Applicants, the same cannot be equated with coercion and the same would have to be ruled out." -- Para 11 "The Applicants have not been able to demonstrate decisively any act on the part of respondents, during the course of execution of consent terms, such as to amount to an offence under the Indian Penal Code." -- Para 12 "Particulars of undue influence are not set forth in the applications in sufficient details." -- Para 13 "Having regard to the class of persons i.e. parties before us, who are none other than brothers, sisters and mother inter se and of full age and sound mind and who executed consent terms are bound by their own act." -- Para 14

Procedural History

On 14th June 2014, respondents filed Petition No. 56/2014 under Sections 397, 398, 402, and 403 of the Companies Act, 1956 -- On 11th October 2022, the National Company Law Tribunal appointed a mediator -- Mediation concluded with Minutes of Meeting dated 12th December 2022, but allegedly failed -- On 9th January 2023, appellants raised objections via email -- Mediator submitted reports on 27th November 2022, 24th January 2023, and 18th March 2023 -- Appellants filed IA No. 143/2023 and IA No. 147/2023 -- National Company Law Tribunal passed order dated 03.10.2023 rejecting applications and disposing of petition -- Appellants filed appeals Company Appeal (AT) Nos. 211 and 212 of 2023

Related Judgement
Tribunals National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Upholds Mediated Consent Terms in Compan...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Appointment of Arbitrator Amidst Time-Bar Concerns in Shareholder Dispute. Supr...