Atul Kumar Kansal vs Crown Abacus Park Association
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 620 of 2021
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
An appeal under Section 61(1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is not maintainable where the appellant is not aggrieved by any order of the Adjudicating Authority; delay in the Adjudicating Authority's disposal of an application under Section 30(6) is not itself an order appealable under Section 61(1), and the Appellate Tribunal may instead dispose of such an appeal with a request that the Adjudicating Authority decide the pending application within a stated period.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Atul Kumar Kansal Resolution Professional, Crown Realtech Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant Vs. Crown Abacus IT Park Association ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. RK Gupta, Mr. Swarlipi Deb Roy, Advocates Mr. Atul Kumar Kansal, RP Party in person For Respondent: Mr. Anjaneya Mishra, Advocate
ORDER
(Through Virtual Mode) 25.08.2021: Heard Ld. Counsel for the Appellant, he submits that RP filed
I.A. No. 5687 of 2020 on 12.12.2020 under Section 30(6) of the IBC seeking
approval of the Resolution Plan before the Adjudicating Authority. The matter
has been listed on various dates but no effective hearing has taken place since
then. The Corporate Debtor is a Real Estate Company and Developing a
Commercial IT Park Project, Faridabad, Haryana, the license to develop the
project was obtained in the year 2008, however, after lapse of 12 years the project
has not been completed and units have not been handed over to the allottees.
Due to inordinate delay in approval of the Resolution Plan the costs of
construction is increasing day by day, therefore, they have filed this Appeal for
seeking direction to the Ld. Adjudicating Authority to dispose of the Application
I.A. No. 5687 of 2020 at the earliest.
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 620 of 2021 2
2. Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent (Successful Resolution
Applicant) supports the argument advanced on behalf of the Appellant.
3. After hearing Ld. Counsels for the parties, we have gone through the
record. We find that the Appeal under Section 61(1) of the IBC is not
maintainable as Appellant is not aggrieved by any of the order of the Adjudicating
Authority. However, the Appellant is aggrieved by huge delay in disposal of
Application under Section 30 (6) of the IBC by the Adjudicating Authority. We
deem it appropriate to dispose of this Appeal with the request to the Adjudicating
Authority that make all endeavour to decide the Application I.A. No. 5687 of 2020
within 30 days.
4. Thus, the Appeal is disposed of and pending I.A.s, if any, are also disposed
of.
5. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the concerned
Adjudicating Authority forthwith.
[Justice Jarat Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial)
[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical)
Sc/md
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 620 of 2021
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