Haravtar Singh Arora vs Punjab National Bank
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1647 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The reasoning here is brief but present: the Tribunal holds that where the appellant had already challenged the same auction in an earlier proceeding, which was rejected and affirmed up to the Supreme Court, there was no occasion for filing a fresh application against that auction, and the subsequent application was therefore rightly rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. Where a challenge to a liquidation auction has already been adjudicated and dismissed in earlier proceedings, including on appeal, a further application by the same party seeking to challenge that same auction is not maintainable and may be rejected.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Haravtar Singh Arora ...Appellant Versus Punjab National Bank & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Present but appearance not marked.
For Respondents : Mr. NPS Chawla, Mr. Surekh Baxy, Mr. Jasjeet and Mr. Pankaj Sethi, Advocates for R-2.
Mr. Manuj Nagrath, Advocate for R-3.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
19.09.2024 : I.A. No. 6003/2024
1. This is an Application praying for condonation of 11 days delay in filing
the Appeal.
2. The ground taken in the Application is that time was taken in obtaining
the necessary affidavits and signature required for filing the Appeal.
Cause shown sufficient. Delay is condoned.
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1647 of 2024
1. This Appeal has been filed against an Order dated 21.05.2024, passed
by the Learned Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal,
Chandigarh Bench, Court - II) in I.A. 1042(CH)/2024 filed by the Appellant,
has been rejected. I.A. was filed on 08.02.2024, challenging the Auction held
on 03.02.2020 in the Liquidation Proceedings.
2. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that Appellant has earlier
challenged the Auction which was rejected and Appeal in the Appellate
Tribunal dismissed on 01.03.2023, against which Order, Appellant also went
to Hon'ble Supreme Court, where the Civil Appeal was dismissed and after
this I.A. 1042(CH)/2024 filed by the Appellant which has been rejected by the
Adjudicating Authority.
3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent further submits that the Appellant
has also not disclosed the proceedings of the Appellate Tribunal as well as the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the present Appeal.
4. Adjudicating Authority did not commit any error in rejecting the
Application, finding no merit in the Application, we are of the view that
Appellant having already challenged the Auction earlier there was no occasion
for filing another Application I.A. 1042(CH)/2024.
There is no merit in the Appeal. The Appeal is dismissed.
Appeal having been dismissed, it shall be open for the Respondent to
approach the Adjudicating Authority for expeditious disposal of the
Liquidation Proceedings.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) himanshu/nn
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1647 of 2024 & I.A. No. 6003 of 2024 2 of 2
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