Gokul A. Agarwal vs State Bank Of India Through Resolution ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 713 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
At the stage of an order appointing a Resolution Professional under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, no adjudicatory issues on the merits of the insolvency application are to be decided; such issues are to be raised at the hearing of the application under Section 100 of the Code, and an appeal against an order confined to such appointment does not warrant entertainment at that stage.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Gokul Aggarwal ...Appellant Versus State Bank of India & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ravi Raghunath, Ms. Alina Merin Mathew, Mr. Aniruth Purusothaman and Mr. Utkarsh Kumar, Advocates. For Respondents :
WITH
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 722 of 2024 & I.A. No. 2597 of 2024
IN THE MATTER OF: Anubhav Aggarwal ...Appellant Versus State Bank of India & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ravi Raghunath, Ms. Alina Merin Mathew, Mr. Aniruth Purusothaman and Mr. Utkarsh Kumar, Advocates. For Respondents :
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
18.04.2024 : I.A. Nos. 2558 & 2597/2024
1. These are applications praying for condonation of 7 days delay in filing
the Appeal.
2. It is submitted that Appellants were not well and had undergone
surgery.
Cause shown sufficient. Delay is condoned.
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) Nos. 713 & 722 of 2024
1. These two Appeals have been filed against the Order dated 15.02.2024
passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal,
Mumbai Bench, Court - II), by which the Resolution Professional has been
appointed in an application filed under Section 95 of the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Code, 2016, (for short 'the Code') by the State Bank of India.
2. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that by an earlier Order
passed dated 09.01.2024 on a request of the Financial Creditor, the matter
was adjourned to 15.02.2024 to enable the Financial Creditor to take steps to
transfer the case to Bench-V.
3. It is submitted that no steps were taken in the meantime.
4. Be that as it may, the order impugned is only appointment of the
Resolution Professional in Section 95 of the Code. All adjudicatory issues have
to be raised at the time of hearing of the application under Section 100 of the
Code.
5. We, thus are of the view that no grounds have been made out to
entertain the Appeals at this stage.
6. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that due to Appellant being
ill they could not file the Reply to the Resolution Professional within time
allowed. It is submitted that next date fixed in the matter is 09.05.2024 before
the Adjudicating Authority.
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) Nos. 713 & 722 of 2024 2 of 3
7. Let Appellant submit Reply within two weeks from today to the
Resolution Professional.
The Appeals are dismissed subject to the aforesaid.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) himanshu/nn
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) Nos. 713 & 722 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