Archana Aggarwal vs State Bank Of India
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1834 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A party who seeks to resist a Section 95 application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 need not have its objections decided at the Section 95 stage; the issues it raises can be taken up at the hearing under Section 100, in line with the procedure laid down by the Supreme Court in Dilip B Jiwrajka, and the Adjudicating Authority's refusal to dismiss the Section 95 application on that ground discloses no error.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Archana Aggarwal ...Appellant(s)
Versus
State Bank of India ...Respondent(s) Present: For Appellant : Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Tanuj Sud, Mr. Ajay Kumar, Mr. Vijayant Goel, Advocates. For Respondents : Mr. Ankur Mittal, Mr. Ankush Kumar, Ms. Preety Choudhary, Advocates for SBI.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode) 01.10.2024: This appeal has been filed against the order dated
03.09.2024 passed by the Adjudicating Authority on IA-4601/2021 which
was filed by the appellant for rejecting Section 95 application filed by the
SBI. The Adjudicating Authority by the impugned order has rejected the
application and following observation has been made-
"In this regard, we may observe that the Hon'ble High Court has granted liberty to the petitioners to raise all pleas available to them in accordance with law in the pending proceedings. At this stage, we may also refer to the Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Dilip B Jiwrajka vs. Union of India & Ors., wherein the Hon'ble Court has clearly laid down the procedures to be followed in an application filed under Section 95(1) of the Code".
CA (AT) (Ins) No. 1834 of 2024 2 We do not find any error in the order of Adjudicating Authority
rejecting the application filed by the appellant for dismissing Section 95
application, as observed by Adjudicating Authority all issues requiring
adjudication can be raised at the time of hearing under Section 100 as it
has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Dilip B Jiwrajka vs. Union
of India & Ors".
The appeal is dismissed with above observation.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) sr/nn
CA (AT) (Ins) No. 1834 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