Introduction: i The five judge Constitutional Bench ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court of india vide its order dated May 14,2015 in Madras Bar Association v. Union of Indiaupheld the Constitutional validity of National Company Law F “Tribunal (NCLT) and National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), This would pve a go ahead to setting Lp of thea Tribunal, constituted to replace the Company Law Board (CLA). the Hoard for industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) and the Appellate Authority for industrial and Financial Reconstruction (anirR Background and Verdict: videamendment made under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956 ("Old Act’) in 2002 by Companies (Second: ‘Amendment) Act, 2002, certain provisions relating to NCLT and NCLAT were incorporated under Part 1B and. 1c. The constitutional vay of these provisions was challenged ina writ petition filed by thé¥aadras Bar Assocation (°MBA") in the Madras High Court However. tthe same time, the High Court pointed out certain defects in various provisions of Part 18 and Part 1C of the Old Act, decarng that those provisions, as existed offended the basicconsitutiona scheme of separation of powers. and twas held that unlessthese provisions are appropriately amended by removing the defects which were also spectcall spelled out it would be Related Articles snconsttutional toconsttute NCLT and NCLAT to exercise the jurisdiction which being exercised by the High f]-Increased Senainy a cour 18. Investment structures nn A further appeal by Union of the Judgment of Madras High Court which Pe ‘by the Constitution Bench. The same was led a= MBA felt aggreved by the part ofthe Angel Funes And mpl ich establishments of NCL LAT was held tobe constitutional, whereas the Union of ina fl ‘re broacer Altern Fund fering from various legal an constitutional intemities:The said appeals were disposed by nc Eze: epost les iow them via Union of na v. R Gand, President. Madras Ba Association, [2010} 18 SCC 1 Stareupsinda SS. Rana bo, Advoates pularly known as Judgment 2010 whereby It was held thain Madras Bar Association v. Union of indiaupheld the Constitutional valiity of National Tribunal (NCLT) and National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). This would give a go. up of the a Tribunal, constituted to replace the Company Law Board (CLB), the Board for Industrial an Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) and the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (AAIFR). Background and Verdict: Videamendment made under the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956 ("Old Act?) in 2002 by Companies (Second Amendment) Act. 2002. certain provisions relating to NCLT and NCLAT were incorporated under Part 18 and. 1c. ‘The constitutional valdty of these provisions was challenged in a writ petition fled by théQMadras Bar Association (’MBAY) inthe Madras High Court. However atthe same time. the High Court pointed out certain detects in various prov jons.as existed, offended the bascconsttutional scheme of wers and it was he ssthese provisions are appropriately amended by pecticalyspeleg out would be unconstitutional toconst being exercise by the High Court or the cs of Part 1B and or ng that of Madras Hig which jeved by the part of the judgment he Union of india felt partly allowing them via Union popularly known as Judgment 2010 whereby it was held that: