Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Adish Jain vs Sumit Bansal & Ors

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal3 February 2021

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Appellate Tribunal may set aside an adjudicating authority's order closing a party's right to file a reply, and grant a final opportunity to file it on terms, where the party's default is shown to be unexcused by the record, the order would otherwise prevent the matter being decided on its merits, and a condition of costs is imposed as the price of relief.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 64 of 2021In the matter of:

Adish Jain ....Appellant Vs. Sumit Bansal & Ors. ....Respondents Present: Appellant: Mr. P. Nagesh, Mr. Harshal Kumar, Mr. Shivam Wadhwa, Advocates. Respondents: Mr. KD Sharma, Mr. Vivek Raheja, Advocates for RP. Mr. PBA Srinivasan, Mr. Parth Tondon, Mr. Avinash Mohapatra, Ms. PS Chandralekha, Advocates for R2 (COC)

ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode)

03.02.2021: The Appellant is aggrieved of closure of his right to file reply in I.A No.3899 of 2020 pending consideration before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench, Court-II. Mr. P. Nagesh, Advocate representing the Appellant while giving up all other prayers made in appeal and on instructions expressing remorse for unfair remarks made against the Bench in Part 1(4) of the memo of appeal confines his prayer only in regard to closure of his right to file reply.

2. After hearing Mr. P. Nagesh, learned counsel for the Appellant, Mr. K.D. Sharma, Advocate representing the Resolution Professional and Ms. PS Chandralekha, Advocate representing the Committee of Creditors, we find that from 7th October, 2020 to 5th January, 2021 Appellant did not respond to the application and failed to file reply despite a clear direction in this regard. Mr. P. Nagesh, learned counsel for the Appellant submits that since a Review Petition

Contd/-..........

-2- was pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court, there was delay in filing reply. The matter still survives for consideration though order on IA 4208 is stated to have been pronounced by the Adjudicating Authority.

3. Having regard to all relevant factors and being of the considered view that it would be appropriate to grant brief respite to Appellant by providing him a final opportunity subject to payment of costs for filing reply to IA 3899/2020 before the Adjudicating Authority so that the issue is decided on merit, we set aside the impugned order to the extent it pertains to IA 3899/2020 and grant the Appellant a week's time reckoned from today as last and final opportunity to file reply failing which right to file the same shall stand closed without reference to the Bench. The filing of reply shall be subject to payment of Rs. 50,000/- as costs to Respondent No.1 which shall be pre-condition for entertaining the reply.

The appeal is accordingly disposed off.

The matter is stated to be listed before the Adjudicating Authority on 24th February, 2021. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Adjudicating Authority.

[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Acting Chairperson

[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical)

[Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical) AR/g

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 64 of 2021

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free