Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Asl Enterprises Ltd vs Adi Ispat Pvt Limited

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal2 September 2024Ashok Bhushan

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

An order of the Adjudicating Authority passed without hearing a party who was not before it when the matter was reserved, and without regard to an earlier subsisting order between the same parties on the same subject, is liable to be set aside on that ground alone.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1294 of 2024

IN THE MATTER OF: ASL Enterprises Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus

Adi Ispat Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents

Present:

For Appellant : Mr. A.K. Shrivastava, Mr. akash Sharma and Mr. Rishav Ranjan, Advocates

For Respondent : Mr. Anoop Prakash Awasthi, Mr. Parthvi Ahuja and Mr. Prapti Singh, Advocates for Liquidator.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

02.09.2024 Heard Counsel for the Appellant and Learned Counsel for

the Liquidator Mr. Anoop Prakash Awasthi.

This Appal has been filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating

Authority dated 18.06.2024 in I.A. (IBC) (Dis) No.1687/KB/2023 filed by the

Liquidator.

The brief facts of the case are that in the liquidation proceeding of the

Corporate Debtor, the Appellant was declared as Successful bidder in

response to the public announcement dated 29.09.2022 issued by the

Liquidator. After the Appellant was declared as Successful bidder an I.A. was

filed by the Appellant being I.A. No.240/KB/2024 praying for reliefs and

concession, the said I.A. was allowed by order dated 10.05.2024 passed by

the Adjudicating Authority granting various reliefs and concessions. Copy of

the order has been brought on the record at page 164 of the Appeal at

Annexure A-3.

It appears that Liquidator has filed the I.A. for dissolution of the

Corporate Debtor being I.A. No.1687/KB/2023. It is submitted that the

Appellant has deposited the entire sale consideration and the possession

letter was also issued by the Liquidator on 04.02.2023 and sale agreement

was executed on 20.03.2023. The order on the application for dissolution was

reserved by the Adjudicating Authority on 04.01.2024 which was allowed by

the Adjudicating Authority by the impugned order dated 18.06.2024. The

Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that in the application filed by

dissolution, the Appellant was not made a party and Appellant was not heard

when the Adjudicating Authority allowed the dissolution. It is submitted that

Appellants could not bring into notice of the Adjudicating Authority of the

earlier order dated 10.05.2024 by which order several reliefs and concession

were granted and the order dated 18.06.2024 was passed in ignorance of the

order dated 10.05.2024 which needs to be set aside.

Learned Counsel for the Liquidator submitted that the sale was not as

going concern sale and it was a sale of assets. The Learned Counsel for the

Liquidator has referred to the reply, which has been filed by the Liquidator in

the present appeal, he has referred to the sale notice dated 20.10.2022 which

accorded to the Appellant was sale as 'as is what is basis, whatever there is

basis and no recourse basis''.

Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that Liquidator has also

filed an application before the Adjudicating Authority for recall of the order

dated 10.05.2024, which is pending for consideration and listed for

04.09.2024.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 1596 & 1297 of 2024 2 of 3 We have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties, and perused the

record.

From the facts which have been brought on record, it does appear that

the Adjudicating Authority has passed the impugned order dated 18.06.2024

in ignorance of the earlier order dated 10.05.2024. Appellant being not before

the Adjudicating Authority at the time of reserving the order on dissolution

Application, the facts could not be noticed by the Adjudicating Authority. The

Adjudicating Authority have already granted reliefs and concession by order

dated 10.05.2024, the order impugned is passed ignorance of the order dated

10.05.2024, which order deserves to be set aside on this ground alone. We

thus, allow the Appeal. Set aside the order dated 18.06.2024.

The application for recall of order dated 10.05.2024 is still pending

before the Adjudicating Authority. We direct that application for dissolution

be also be listed before the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority

may pass an order after hearing both the parties.

The Appeal is disposed of.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) pks/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 1596 & 1297 of 2024 3 of 3

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