Grand Arch Resident Welfare ... vs Ireo Private Limited
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 271 of 2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority, exercising its inherent power under Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, may take on record a reply filed by a party after its right to reply was closed, where doing so is necessary to secure substantial justice and does not involve a review on the merits of any issue already decided; such a step is not an exercise of review power and is not, in itself, open to appellate interference.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Grand Arch Resident Welfare Association ...Appellant
Versus
Ireo Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellants: Mr. Chinmoy Pradip Sharma, Mr. Irfan Hasieb and Asiya Khan, Advocates For Respondents: With Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 272 of 2022
IN THE MATTER OF:
Grand Arch Resident Welfare Association ...Appellant
Versus
Ireo Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellants: Mr. Chinmoy Pradip Sharma, Mr. Irfan Hasieb and Asiya Khan, Advocates For Respondents:
ORDER
(Virtual Mode)
16.03.2022: Heard Mr. Chinmoy Pradip Sharma, Advocate for the
Appellant.
2. This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 23.09.20221
passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New
Delhi, Court IV) in IA 4291/ND/2021 in IB-989/ND/2020. By which Order,
the Application filed by the Corporate Debtor to modify the Order dated 10th
December, 2020 has been allowed and the Reply filed by the Corporate 2
Debtor has been taken on record. The Appellant Home-Buyer
Association/Financial Creditor filed an Application under Section 7 of the
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 on which the Order was passed on
10.12.2020 as under:
"None appeared for the applicant. On 03.11.2020, Learned Counsel for the
Corporate Debtor had undertaken to file reply within two weeks but till date
no reply is filed and seeks further time. As a last chance to Corporate Debtor
to file reply within five days, failing which, right to file reply will be closed.
Rejoinder, if any, within five days hereinafter, with copy in advance to the
other side.
List on 14.01.2021."
3. Subsequently another Order was passed on 14.01.2021 relying on
earlier Order dated 10.12.2022 observing that 'Right to file Reply is closed'.
The Corporate Debtor thereafter filed an Application i.e. I.A. No. 4291 of
2021 praying that Order dated 10.12.2020 be modified and the Reply of the
Applicant Corporate Debtor be taken on record.
4. The Reply was filed along with the Application i.e. I.A. No. 4291 of
2021 which has been taken on record by the Impugned Order. Learned
Counsel for the Appellant contends that when the right to reply was cloased
on 10.12.2020 and the same was reiterated on 14.01.2021 there was no
power with the Adjudicating Authority to review its earlier Order by accepting
the Reply of the Applicant-Corporate Debtor. It is submitted that on account
of right to file reply having been closed by the Adjudicating Authority, right
accrued to the Applicant which could not have been taken away by the
Impugned Order.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 271 and 272 of 2022 3
5. We have considered the submissions of Learned Counsel for the
Appellant and perused the record.
6. From the facts brought on record, it is clear that Reply could not be
been filed by the Corporate Debtor and the right to file Reply was closed on
10.12.2020 which was again reiterated on 14.01.2021. Subsequently along
with the I.A. as above said, Copy of the Reply was annexed and request was
made to take the Reply on record by modifying the Order dated 10.12.2020.
Present is not the case where the Adjudicating Authority has exercised its
power of review on merits of any issue decided by the Adjudicating Authority.
Present is the case where with regard to the pleading i.e. accepting the Reply,
inherent power has been exercised by the Adjudicating Authority under Rule
11 of the NCLT, Rules. We are of the view that substantial justice has been
done by the Adjudicating Authority in taking the Reply on record. We have
further noticed that the Appellants are Home Buyer Association and Reply of
the Corporate Debtor being on record shall give a great assistance to the
Adjudicating Authority in adjudicating the issues raised by the Appellant i.e.
Financial Creditor. We are thus of the view that present is not the case where
this Tribunal should exercise its appellate power. The Appeal is dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical)
Basant/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 271 and 272 of 2022
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