Hemalata Hospitals Limited vs Siba Kumar Mohapatra
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1483 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appeal against the rejection of an application to set aside the Resolution Professional's termination of the service and lease agreements is dismissed on the ground that, once the Resolution Plan for the Corporate Debtor has been approved, a counterparty whose service and lease arrangements were permitted under the earlier agreements cannot continue to operate those facilities after approval of the Resolution Plan.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Hemalata Hospitals Ltd. ....Appellant Vs. SIBA Kumar Mhapatra ...Respondent
For Appellant Mr. Tishampati Sen, Mr. Shubhanshu Gupta, Mr. Kartik Pant, Advocates. For Respondent Mr. Shouryendu Ray, Mr. Anshul Gondale, Mr. Vatsala Poddar, Advocates.
ORDER
(HYBRID MODE)
22.11.2023: This appeal has been filed against the order dated
09.08.2023 passed in I.A. No.2750 of 2022 which application was filed by the
Appellant praying for setting aside the termination of Service Agreement dated
01.09.2006, Lease Agreement dated 31.12.2013 along with Supplementary
Agreement dated 01.01.2014. The Corporate Debtor by the aforesaid Service
Agreement had permitted the Appellant to run certain facilities. The
Resolution Professional has terminated the Service Agreement and other Lease
Agreement to enable the Resolution of the Corporate Debtor. The Adjudicating
Authority by the impugned order has rejected the application taking the view
that the Appellant was related party and hence, the Resolution Professional 2
has rightly terminated the agreements and there was no approval by the CoC
to continue the related party transactions.
2. We are of the view that since the Corporate Debtor is to be resolved and
Resolution Plan has already been approved by order of the same date i.e.
09.08.2023, the Appellant who was permitted by a Service Agreement and
Lease Agreement to carry certain facilities can no longer continue after
approval of the Resolution Plan, hence, due to the above reason, we are not
inclined to entertain the appeal. There is no merit in the Appeal. The Appeal
is dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
Anjali/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1483 of 2023 & I.A. No. 5318 of 2023
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