Giant Stride Capital Mu Limited ... vs Shah Alloys Limited

Giant Stride Capital MU Ltd. Formerly known as AMIF I Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus

Shah Alloys Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Mohit Rohtagi, Mr. Vividh Tandon, Mr. Kaustub Narendran, Mr. Ashwini Kumar Tak and Ms. Nutan Keswani, Advocates. For Respondent: Mr. Ramji Srinivasan, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Gauri Rasgotra, Ms. Natasha Dhruman Shah, Ms. Priyashree Sharma PH, Mr. Saurav Baisoya, Mr. Girish Ahuja, Mr. Kartik Pandy, Ms. Namrata Saraogi, Advocates.

ORDER

17.08.2023: Heard Shri Krishnendu Datta, learned senior counsel for

the Appellant and Shri Ramji Srinivasan, learned senior counsel for the

Respondent. This Appeal has been filed against order dated 24.07.2023 by

which order the Adjudicating Authority directed the Appellant to produce

details of consideration paid for acquiring the bonds as it is vital to decision

in the case and further directed the Appellant to produce evidence that claim

was lodged before the trustee and/or the Corporate Debtor before filing the

application under Section 7 of I&B Code.

2. Learned counsel for the Appellant challenging the order contends that

earlier an order was passed on 06.06.2023, in pursuance of which an affidavit

Cont'd.../ -2-

has already been filed by the Appellant. It is submitted that there was no

requirement of asking for the documents as contained in the order dated

24.07.2023. It is submitted that in the order dated 06.06.2023 by direction

Clause (g) same direction was given. Learned counsel for the Appellant

further submitted that the Adjudicating Authority by the order dated

24.07.2023 has held the payments as vital in the case whereas Appellant has

not yet made his submissions. He submits that Appellant has still to contend

before the Adjudicating Authority that details of consideration are not vital.

3. Learned counsel for the Respondent has opposed the submissions of

the Appellant and submitted that the Adjudicating Authority has given

opportunity to the Appellant to file relevant documents and Adjudicating

Authority has yet to take a final decision and by subsequent order dated

10.08.2023 matter has been fixed for 21.08.2023 for completion of

arguments.

4. From the facts as has been placed before us, it is clear that the

Appellant has not filed the document as asked for by the order dated

24.07.2023 and the Adjudicating Authority having already given opportunity

to the Appellant to make his submissions, we are of the view that there is no

reason to entertain the Appeal at this stage. It was always open for the

Appellant to make all submissions before the Adjudicating Authority, which

opportunity is already given. With these observations Appeal is dismissed.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1080 of 2023 -3-

5. Shri Krishnendu Datta has reiterated his submission that documents

are not vital. It is open for the parties to make their submissions before the

Adjudicating Authority and it is for the Adjudicating Authority to take a call

on it.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Archana/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1080 of 2023