Anil Syal vs Union Bank Of India
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1437 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority's power to set aside a completed e-auction of bankruptcy estate property, and to direct a fresh auction with a minimum interval of thirty days between paper publication and the e-auction so as to attract more bidders and fetch a higher value, is not interfered with on appeal where the appellant raises no ground against the direction for re-auction itself. Where a bankruptcy trustee has been directed by the Adjudicating Authority to conduct a fresh auction, it is the bankruptcy trustee, and not some other authority, who is to hold that auction as directed; an appellant's request that a different authority conduct the re-auction is not accepted. A question whether the Bankruptcy Trustee should have filed an application under Section 38(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is not a subject matter of the appeal; an appellant wishing to raise discharge or that issue must make an appropriate application before the Adjudicating Authority, and the Appellate Tribunal leaves that avenue open without deciding it.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Anil Syal ...Appellant
Versus
Union Bank of India & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Ms. Prachi Johri, Ms. Abhipsa Sahu, Advocates. For Respondents : Mr. Milan Singh Negi, Mr. Nikhil Kumar Jha, Advocates for R-2.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
30.07.2024: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant and learned
counsel appearing for the Bankruptcy Trustee. This Appeal has been filed
against order dated 04.07.2024 by which order the Adjudicating Authority
has allowed the IA No.4421 of 2024 filed by Union Bank of India for setting
aside the e-auction dated 27.06.2023.
2. Bankruptcy process was initiated against the Appellant in pursuance
of petition filed by the Appellant under Section 121 r/w Section 122 of the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Bank had filed a claim and thereafter
auction of the property situated at First Floor 117, Uday Park, New Delhi took
place. Application was filed by Union Bank of India praying for setting aside
auction sale. The Adjudicating Authority after hearing the parties have
allowed the application, setting aside the e-auction and directed the
Bankruptcy Trustee to conduct a fresh auction. Direction in Para 22 is as
follows:
Cont'd.../ 2
"22. Accordingly, the IA-4421/2023 is allowed by setting aside the e-auction dated 27.06.2023 conducted by the bankruptcy trustee by directing the bankruptcy trustee to conduct a fresh auction by maintaining at least 30 days' time between the paper publication and the e-auction so as to enable more bidders to participate in the auction for fetching high value of the property. The bankruptcy trustee shall also clearly mention the timings for the inspection of the property in the paper publication."
3. Learned counsel for the Appellant challenging the order submits that
as far as Appellant is concerned Appellant has no issue with regard to re-
auction of the asset, however, the re-auction be conducted by some other
authority. Appellant's case is that although one year period has elapsed from
initiation of the bankruptcy process but no application under Section 38(1)(a)
has been filed by the Bankruptcy Trustee.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the Bankruptcy Trustee submits that
the issue regarding filing of application under Section 38(1)(a) of the Code has
to be agitated before the Adjudicating Authority by the Appellant, if any and
said issue is not the subject matter of the present appeal.
5. In view of the aforesaid, we are of the view that in so far as present
appeal, we do not find any ground to interfere with the order directing for re-
auction of the property. We, however, give liberty to the Appellant to make
appropriate application before the Adjudicating Authority for raising the issue
of discharge of Appellant.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1437 of 2024 3
6. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that although Appellant has
no issue with regard to re-auction but the re-auction should be held by some
other authority and he may be discharged in the meanwhile. We are unable
to accept the submission of the Appellant that re-auction should be held by
some other authority. It is the Bankruptcy Trustee who has to hold the
auction as directed by the Adjudicating Authority. Appeal is disposed of
accordingly.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1437 of 2024
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