Ishan Singh vs Spaze Towers Private Limited

Ishan Singh ...Appellant

Versus

Spaze Towers Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Arjun Syal, Mr. Shreyan Das and Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocates. For Respondent: Mr. Sumesh Dhawan, Ms. Vatsala Kak and Mr. Yash Srivastava, Advocates.

ORDER

01.09.2023: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant and learned

counsel appearing for the Respondent. This Appeal has been filed against the

order dated 22.11.2022 passed in I.A. No. 5671/ND/2022 which was filed by

the Appellant. A Section 7 application has been filed by the Appellant before

the NCLT, New Delhi, Court IV, in which Section 7 application I.A. No.

5671/ND/2022 was filed by the Appellant praying to take on record

application of the Corporate Debtor filed under Section 13(4) of the Companies

Act, 2013 read with Rule 30 of Company (Incorporation) Rules, 2014.

2. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the document which was

sought to be brought on record was an application which was filed by the

Corporate Debtor for shifting of registered office from NCT of Delhi to State of

Haryana. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that in proceedings

Cont'd.../ -2-

under Section 7 orders passed in the proceedings under Section 13 of the

Companies Act cannot be questioned, however, the documents may be

relevant in Section 7 application which has to be looked into by the

Adjudicating Authority.

3. Learned counsel for the Respondent opposing the submissions of

learned counsel for the Appellant submits that in application under Section 7

only debt and default and territorial jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority

has to be looked into and the document was not relevant and the Adjudicating

Authority has rightly rejected the application.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5. The document which was sought to be placed by the Appellant on record

was the application which was filed by the Corporate Debtor itself seeking for

shifting of registered office from NCT of Delhi to State of Haryana before the

Regional Director, Ministry of Corporate Affairs. We accept the submission of

the Appellant that in proceeding under Section 7 orders passed in the

proceedings under Section 13 of the Companies Act, 2013 cannot be

questioned. Whether the documents have any relevance or not has to be

considered by the Adjudicating Authority after the document is seen. The

Respondent has full liberty to raise objection with regard to relevance of the

document and to support its submission that it does not improve the case of

the Appellant in any manner.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.226 of 2023 -3-

6. We, thus, are of the view that the Adjudicating Authority ought to have

taken the document on record and thereafter examine the relevance of the

document, if any, after hearing the parties. We are satisfied that the

Adjudicating Authority erred in rejecting the application filed by the Appellant

to take on record documents which was a document filed by the Corporate

Debtor itself.

7. We, thus, are of the view that I.A. No. 5671/ND/2022 deserves to be

allowed. The document be taken on record. We make it clear that we are not

expressing any opinion on the worth of the document, which is to be looked

into by the Adjudicating Authority and decided after hearing the parties.

Appeal is disposed of accordingly.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.226 of 2023