In the matter of Sri Dakshinamurthy Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd.
- CitationCompany Petition IB-334-2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a financial creditor's Section 7 petition has been rejected with liberty to apply afresh upon the corporate debtor's default in a stipulated payment, the Tribunal may recall an erroneous restoration of that petition and grant liberty to file a fresh petition, since the earlier order contemplated a fresh application and restoration would affect the merits, including the date of default, which the parties had settled.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
SL. No.1 NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH COURT HALL NO: II Hearing Through: VC and Physical (Hybrid) Mode CORAM: SHRI. RAJEEV BHARDWAJ, HON’BLE MEMBER (J) CORAM: SHRI. SANJAY PURI, - HON’BLE MEMBER (T) ATTENDANCE-CUM-ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING OF NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, HYDERABAD BENCH, HELD ON 09.01.2024 AT 10:30 AM TRANSFER PETITION NO.
COMPANY PETITION/APPLICATION NO. Company Petition IB/334/2022
NAME OF THE COMPANY Sri Dakshinamurthy Agro Industries Pvt Ltd NAME OF THE PETITIONER(S) Union Bank of India NAME OF THE RESPONDENT(S) Sri Dakshinamurthy Agro Industries Pvt Ltd UNDER SECTION 7 of IBC
Order
1. While writing the Judgement, it has come to our notice that on 25.11.2022 the Bench had passed the following order:
“Orders pronounced vide separate sheets. In the result, CP(IB)334/7/HDB/2022 is rejected, however, in the event of default in making payment of Rs.4.50 crores by 31.12.2022 by the Corporate Debtor, liberty is granted to the Financial Creditor to apply afresh for initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor as per Law”. (emphasis supplied) 2. However, this Authority vide order dated 13.06.2023 restored the Company Petition (IB) No. 334/7/HDB/2022 instead of asking the Applicant/Financial Creditor to file a fresh petition.
Apoorva
3. The restoration of Company Petition (IB) No. 334/7/HDB/2022 has impact on the merits of the case, particulars relating to date of default in terms of settlement between the parties.
4. Therefore, relying on the judgement of the Hon’ble NCLAT in Union Bank of India vs Dinakar T. Venkatasubramanian & Ors IA No.3961 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.729 of 2022 which was upheld by the Hon’ble Apex Court, we in the interest of justice, and recognizing the oversight of the directions given in the order 25.11.2022, recall the order dated 13.06.2023 pertaining to the restoration of the petition.
5. As a result, the applicant/financial creditor is given liberty to file petition afresh for initiation of CIRP against the Corporate Debtor. The Company Petition (IB) No.334/7/HDB/2022 stand disposed of.
Sd/- Sd/- MEMBER (T) MEMBER (J)
Apoorva
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