Allied Media Network Pvt. Ltd vs M/S. Sanraa Media Ltd

Allied Media Network Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant

Vs.

M/s. Sanraa Media Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant: - Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate.

ORDER

18.10.2017- The appellant preferred an application under Section

433(e) of the Companies Act, 1956 before the Hon'ble Madras High Court.

Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Companies (Transfer of Pending Proceedings)

Rules, 2016 notified by Central Government on 7th December, 2016 the

case was transferred to the Adjudicating Authority.

2. Notification dated 7th December, 2016 was subsequently modified

by the Companies (Transfer of Pending Proceedings) second amendment

Rules, 2017 by notification dated 29th June, 2017. Rule 5 therein

reads as follows: -

"5. Transfer ofpending proceedings of Winding up

on the ground of inability to pay debts.- (1) All

petitions relating to winding up under clause (e) of

section 433 of the Act on the ground of inability to

pay its debts pending before a High Court, and -2-

where the petition has not been served on the

respondent as required under rule 26 of the

Companies (Court) Rules, 1959 shall be

transferred to the Bench of the Tribunal

established under sub-section (4) of section 419 of

the Act, exercising territorial jurisdiction and such

petitions shall be treated as applications under

sections 7, 8 or 9 of the Code, as the case may be,

and dealt with in accordance with Part II of the

Code:

Provided that the petitioner shall submit all

information, other than information forming part of

the records transferred in accordance with Rule 7,

required for admission of the petition under

sections 7, 8 or 9 of the Code, as the case may be,

including details of the proposed insolvency

professional to the Tribunal within sixty days from

date of this notification, failing which the petition

shall stand abated.

Provided furt her that any party or parties to

the petitions shall, after the 15th day of July, 2017, -3-

be eligible tofilefresh applications under sections

7 or 8 or 9 of the Code, as the case may be, in

accordance with the provisions of the Code:

Provided also that where a petition relating

to winding up of a company is not transferred to

the Tribunal under this rule and remains in the

High Court and where there is another petition

under clause € of Section 433 of the Act for

winding up against the same company pending as

on 15th December, 2016, such other petition shall

not be transferred to the Tribunal, even if the

petition has not been served on the respondent."

3. After transfer of the case, the appellant filed affidavit and bank

statement and other required statutory formalities, but not filed the same

within the time limit i.e. 15th July, 2017, but on 19th July 2017. In this

background, the Adjudicating Authority declared the application abated

by the impugned order dated 22th August, 2017, which reads as follows:

"Counsel for petition present and filed an affidavit in

proof of the paper publication made for the appearance

of the respondent for his appearance and for making

submissions. Respondent called absent. No -4-

representation. While hearing the arguments, it is

submitted that the petitioner has filed affidavit and

bank statement u/s 9(3)(b)&(c) and other required

statutory formalities to be complied as per lB Code,

2016 only on 19.07.2017. in view of the notification

dated 29.06.2017 issued by the Ministry of Corporate

Affairs, the matter stands closed as abated."

4. We agree with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the

appellant that pursuant to earlier notification, six months' time was

allowed which is beyond 19th July, 2017 but in view of the subsequent

notification dated 29th June, 2017. Last date of submissions has been

forwarded resulting abatement of the application, without any fault on

the part of the appellant.

5. In the present case, even if we set aside the impugned order dated

22nd August, 2017 on the ground that the appellant was entitled to file

bank statement u/s 9(3)(b)&(c) and other required statutory formalities

even on 19th July, 2017, but that will not suffice give any relief to the

appellant asmore than five months have passed thereafter.

6. In the circumstances, in terms of Rule 5 aforesaid, we allow the

appellant to file fresh application under Section 7 or Section 9, as the

case may be, after fulfilling the requirements under 'I&B Code'. If such

application is filed within the reasonable period, the Adjudicating -5-

Authority will consider the same in accordance with law uninfluenced by

the impugned order dated 22nd August, 2017. The appeal stands disposed

of with aforesaid observations.

Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson

(Justice Bansi Lal Bhat) Member(Judicial)

Ar/uk