Ats Le Grandiose Ph-1 Welfare ... vs Ask Trusteeship Services Private ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 122 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an appeal against an order admitting a Section 7 application and commencing CIRP is filed by a party whose challenge to the same order has already been dismissed by the Tribunal in a companion appeal, the Tribunal cannot pass a different order in the later appeal; having upheld the order of admission in the earlier proceeding, it is bound by that determination and the later appeal stands dismissed. Homebuyers who assert hardship arising from the continuation of the corporate insolvency resolution process may seek relief by a fresh application before the Adjudicating Authority, which is to consider and decide such an application in accordance with law; the appellate forum does not itself adjudicate such grievances in an appeal confined to the admission order.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
ATS Le Grandiose Ph-1 Welfare Association ...Appellant
Versus
ASK Trusteeship Services Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Saurabh Jain, Mr. Prayag Jain, Mr. Aashish Sethi, Advocates. For Respondents: Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Vala Srihitha, Ms. Diksha Gupta, Advocates.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
18.01.2024: Heard learned counsel for the parties. This Appeal has been
filed against order dated 24.11.2023 passed by the Adjudicating Authority by
which application filed under Section 7 has been admitted and CIRP has been
commenced against the Corporate Debtor - M/s Nobility Estates Pvt. Ltd. This
Appeal has been filed by 'ATS Le Grandiose Ph-1 Welfare Association'
challenging the order.
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the project has
proceeded substantially and there are certain towers which are complete and
process is also going on with regard to other units and in event CIRP is allowed
to continue the Homebuyers will suffer. It is submitted that the
commencement of CIRP will cause hardship to the Homebuyers.
Cont'd.../ -2-
3. Shri Arun Kathpalia, learned senior counsel for the Respondent submits
that an appeal was filed by the Suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor
challenging the same order which has already been dismissed by this Tribunal
being Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.1575 of 2023 by judgment dated
10.01.2024 upholding the order of commencement of CIRP.
4. We having upheld the order passed under Section 7, we cannot pass a
different order in the present appeal. We are of the view that the Homebuyers
for their grievances may filed appropriate application before the Adjudicating
Authority, praying for such relief as may be advised. The Adjudicating
Authority may consider such application, if filed and take appropriate decision
in accordance with law. With these observations, we dismiss this appeal.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.122 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