Anuj Shrikant Tibrewla vs Minwool Rock Fibres Ltd

IN THE MATTER OF: Anuj Shrikant Tiberewala, ...Appellant Sole Proprietor of Usha Chemicals

Versus Minwool Rock Fibres Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Advocate Lz. Merchant For Respondent:

ORDER

(Virtual Mode)

26.05.2022: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.

2. This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 04.04.2022 passed by

the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Cuttack Bench,

Cuttack). By which order, the Application being MA(IB) No. 11/CB/2021 seeking

amendment of Section 9 Petition filed by the Appellant has been rejected.

3. The Application being MA(IB) No. 11/CB/2021 was filed in TP No.

200/CTB/2019 i.e. the amendment came to be filed after more than two years

when once the Application was decided on basis of consent terms and

subsequently it was revived.

Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 586 of 2022 2

4. We are satisfied that ample reasons have been given by the Adjudicating

Authority in the Impugned Order from Paragraphs 6 to 8 to reject the

Amendment Application.

5. We do not find any error in the Order impugned so as to entertain this

Appeal. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the observations made

in paragraph 8 in the last line 'there is no proof for the payment made by the

Respondent' is not correct. He submits that he has ample document to show the

payment. It is for the Appellant to take leave of the Adjudicating Authority for

bringing any 'Additional Document', if any, to prove his payment.

With these observations, the Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Mr. Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical)

Basant/nn

Company Appeal (AT) Ins. No. 586 of 2022