Electro Magnetic Industries vs Energo Engineering Projects Ltd
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 660 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where liquidation proceedings have already been initiated against a corporate debtor, a claimant whose machinery has been handed over under an earlier order may file its claim before the Liquidator, who is to verify, consolidate and admit or reject claims in accordance with Sections 35, 38, 39 and 40 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, with any grievance against the Liquidator's decision lying by way of appeal under Section 42 to the Adjudicating Authority.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Electro Magnetic Industries ...Appellant
Vs.
M/s. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: - Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate.
For Respondent: - Mr. Abhishek Anand and Ms. Honey Satpal, Advocates.
O R D E R
25.11.2019─ Mr. Ankit Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the Appellant submits that the Appellant has handed over the
machinery to 'M/s. Sanjay Gandhi Thermal Power Project, 'Madhya
Pradesh Power Generating Company Limited' in terms of the order dated
24th May, 2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company
Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi. It is also accepted by the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Liquidator.
2. As it is admitted that the liquidation proceeding has already been
initiated, we allow the Appellant to file its claim before the Liquidator of
'M/s. Energo Engineering Projects Limited' who is required to verify the
claims under Clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 35 of the Insolvency
Contd/-.......
-2-
and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("I&B Code" for short) and thereafter, on
consolidation of claims under Section 38 of the 'I&B Code' and after
verification of claims under Section 39, it is the Liquidator who is
empowered to admit or reject the claim under Section 40. If the Appellant
is aggrieved thereafter may prefer appeal under Section 42 before the
Adjudicating Authority.
So far as the imposition of cost or penalty or payment of interest is
concerned, we are of the view that it is not a fit case.
The appeal stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and
directions. No costs.
(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson
(Justice Bansi Lal Bhat) Member(Judicial)
(Justice Venugopal M) Member(Judicial)
Ar/g
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 660 of 2019
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