NCLT benches share courtrooms, hear cases in half-day sittings, Bar tells SC

Why in the News

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) was set up as a specialised forum for company and insolvency disputes, yet most of its courts now sit for only half a day. The NCLT Bar Association has told the Supreme Court that 18 of the tribunal’s 31 courts work half-day and that four Delhi benches share two courtrooms in a “dilapidated” building. The Supreme Court case tests whether a tribunal built for speed can work without rooms or members.

What is the NCLT, and why does courtroom time matter?

1. National Company Law Tribunal: A quasi-judicial body, meaning one that decides disputes like a court, set up under the Companies Act, 2013. It works like a specialised court for companies, sparing ordinary courts.
2. Insolvency adjudicator: It decides corporate insolvency cases, where a company cannot repay its debts, under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). Appeals go to the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).
3. Judicial and technical members: Benches combine judges and technical experts. The Supreme Court’s suo motu case (one it took up on its own) covers their appointment and the tribunal’s infrastructure.
4. Network and strength: The tribunal has 15 benches, including its main Principal Bench in Delhi, and a sanctioned strength of 63 members including its President.
5. The takeaway: A tribunal that cannot sit full days cannot deliver the speed it was created for, so its buildings have become an access to justice question.

What has the Bar told the Supreme Court?

1. Half-day sittings in Delhi: A Registrar’s notice, effective 8 October 2026, put the Delhi benches on morning and afternoon shifts, so each sits only half a day.
2. Shared rooms: The Principal Bench holds one room in the forenoon and another court uses it in the afternoon. Two more courts divide a second room the same way.
3. Unfilled posts: The Bar’s affidavit lists 16 vacancies among members and states that posts notified in 2024 are still unfilled.

Why is the Delhi building unsafe?

1. Dilapidated premises: The Delhi benches sit in Block 3 of the CGO Complex on Lodhi Road, which the affidavit calls “an old and dilapidated building”.
2. Structural inspection: The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research’s Central Building Research Institute (CSIR-CBRI), Roorkee, found severe cracks, bulging, flaking concrete (spalling) and corrosion in slabs, beams and columns in September.
3. Corroded steel: Reinforcement, the steel bars inside concrete, had corroded by more than 30% in columns and beams. The institute recommended rebuilding the terrace slab, where steel was completely lost in places.
4. Repair fallout: The Central Public Works Department (CPWD) warned that loose concrete could fall during repairs, so the seventh floor was vacated, removing two more courtrooms.
5. Borrowed space: A stand-by courtroom in Block 12 belongs to the Staff Selection Commission (SSC), which wants it back. The tribunal also holds its Registry floor only on temporary use.

What does the Bar want?

1. A purpose-built building: The Bar asked for land and one building housing both the NCLT and the NCLAT, close to the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court.
2. Land options: It suggested the Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) bus depot next to the CGO Complex and an area in Sewa Nagar.
3. Mumbai bench: The Mumbai bench works from an old, leased Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) building at Cuffe Parade, with structural problems and inadequate lifts.

Challenges

1. Insolvency timelines at risk: Corporate insolvency cases are meant to close within 180 to 270 days, so half-day sittings that stretch hearings put this deadline at risk.
2. Slow appointments: Delays in appointing members leave tribunals short-staffed, a problem common across Indian tribunals.
3. Ministry control: Tribunals sit under the administrative control of their parent ministry, so their buildings and staff depend on decisions outside the tribunal.
4. Safety risk: Hearings continue in a building with corroded structural steel.

Way Forward

1. Appointment calendar: Start selection before posts fall vacant and fill member vacancies within a fixed period.
2. Safe interim courtrooms: Allot safe interim premises so every bench can sit full days until a permanent building is ready.
3. National Tribunals Commission: Create an independent umbrella body to manage the appointments and infrastructure of all tribunals.
4. e-Tribunals: Digitise filing and hearings so that shared rooms do not cut sitting time.

Conclusion

The NCLT’s problem is no longer legal design but the rooms, safe buildings and members a tribunal needs to sit. The next marker is whether the Supreme Court sets a time-bound plan for a permanent building and appointments in the suo motu case.

Matching Previous Year Question

“[2009] Consider the following statements : 1. Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) was set up during the Prime Ministership of Lal Bahadur Shastri. 2. The Members for CAT are drawn from both judicial and administrative streams. Which of the statements given above is/are correct ? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2 ANSWER: (b)”