Haridwar Highways Project Limited vs National Asset Reconstruction Company ...

IN THE MATTER OF: Haridwar Highways Project Ltd. ...Appellants Versus National Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Sunil Fernandes Sr. Advocate with Ms. Muskan Surana, Ms. Manvi Jain and Ms. S. Rai, Advocates. For Respondents : Mr. Abhishek Anand, Ms. Aditi Sinha and Ms. Palak Kalra, Advocates.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

19.08.2025: Heard Counsel for the appellant and Ld. Counsel for the

respondent.

2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 11.08.2025 on IA No.

903/ND/2025. The IA was filed by the appellant- the corporate debtor

praying for recall of the order dated 03.02.2025 by which Adjudicating

Authority directed to proceed ex-parte against the corporate debtor. Notices

were issued in Section 7 application which were not served, Adjudicating

Authority directed for substituted service after substituted service affidavit of

service was filed and the court proceed to hear Section 7 application.

3. The application filed by the appellant for recall of the order dated

03.02.2025 has been heard and allowed by the impugned order, however, by

allowing the application the cost of Rs.5 Lacs have been imposed by the appellant to be deposited in Prime Minister National Relief Fund. Appellant

aggrieved by the imposition of cost has come up in this appeal. Ld. Counsel

for the appellant submits that in the facts of the present case there was no

occasion to impose such heavy cost of Rs.5 Lacs. The order dated 03.02.2025

was uploaded on 17.02.2025 and thereafter application for recall was filed.

The appellant was never served with the notices. Ld. Counsel for the

respondent refuting the submissions of the appellant submits that the

appellant was served through email which is registered with the MCA and

tracking report shows that no one was found at the place but the intimation

was given. It is submitted that the substituted service was resorted to after

the order of the court. In facts of the present case, the Adjudicating Authority

has allowed the application subject to payment of cost.

4. We have considered the submission of the parties and perused the

records.

5. The Adjudicating Authority by the impugned order has already allowed

the application and recalled the order to proceed ex-parte and permitted the

appellant to file its reply on or before 20.08.2025.

6. In facts of the present case we are of the view that imposition of the

cost of Rs.5 Lacs was excessive. We reduce the cost to Rs.1 Lakh. The order

being passed today, we permit the appellant to deposit the cost on or before

24.08.2025 and file the Reply on or before 25.08.2025, the date already fixed

in the matter.

2 of 3 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1233 of 2025

7. It is open for the Adjudicating Authority to proceed further on the next

date of hearing.

With the above, Appeal is disposed of.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) harleen/NN

3 of 3 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1233 of 2025