Amit Chauhan vs Prabhjit Singh Soni & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1177 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an adjudicating authority disposes of an application by a non-speaking order that gives no reasons, the order cannot stand as a decision on the merits of that application, and the appellate tribunal may set it aside and remit the matter to the adjudicating authority for a decision on merits. Home-buyers who hold a majority interest may seek the removal of an authorised representative and an interim resolution professional by convening a meeting in the presence of the interim resolution professional, with the resulting decision placed before the Committee of Creditors and, if the Committee's decision is adverse, carried to the adjudicating authority for determination on merits.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Amit Chauhan ...Appellant
Versus
Mr. Prabhjit Singh Soni & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Alok Dhir, Ms. Varsha Banerjee and Mr. Kunal Godhwani, Advocates For Respondents : Mr. Manoj Kumar Garg and Mr. Kundan Kr. Roy, Advocates for 'Interim Resolution Professional' Mr. Pankaj Agarwal, Advocate ORDER
11.11.2019 The Appellant, on behalf of number of home-buyers', wanted to remove 'Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal' - 'Authorised Representative' as he was not acting in the interest of the 'home buyers'. It is also stated that the 'Interim Resolution Professional' was also hand in glove with the 'Authorised Representative', and therefore, the Appellant about more than 50% of the majority 'home buyers' remove the 'Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal' - 'Authorised Representative' and 'Mr. Prabhjit Singh Soni' - 'Interim Resolution Professional'.
In the meeting of the 'Committee of Creditors', it is informed that the 50% of the 'Home-Buyers' wanted to remove the 'Interim Resolution Professional' and 42% are in support of the 'Interim Resolution Professional' and 8% were absent. Inspite of that 'Authorised Representative' and the 'Interim Resolution Professional' have not been removed and majority of the 'Home Buyers preferred C.A. No. 1429(PB)/2019 before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi which has been dismissed by a non- speaking impugned order dated 30th September, 2019.
Mr. Manoj Kumar Garg, Advocate appears on behalf of the 'Interim Resolution Professional' and refuted the allegations.
In the present case we find that the impugned order dated 30th September,
2019 is a non-speaking order and reads as follows:
"CA-1429(PB)/2019 :-
The present application stands dismissed."
In the circumstances, we are of the view that the matter requires reconsideration by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi. The impugned order dated 30th September, 2019 so far it relates to C.A. No. 1429(PB)/2019 is set aside. The Appellant and the Home-Buyers are allowed to call for a meeting in the presence of the 'Interim Resolution Professional' and in their meeting they will decide whether to remove 'Mr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal' - 'Authorised Representative' and 'Mr. Prabhjit Singh Soni' - 'Interim Resolution Professional'. The 'Interim Resolution Professional' will call for such meeting on or before 25th November, 2019. The decision, as may be taken, be placed before the 'Committee of Creditors', who initially decided the matter which is decided against the majority of the home-buyers. It will be open to them to move before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi who will decide the matter on merits.
The appeal is disposed of.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[Justice Venugopal M.] Member (Judicial)
[Justice Jarat Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial) /ns/sk
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1177 of 2019
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