Ishrat Ali vs The Registrar Nclt Mumbai Bench
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 372 of 2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
An application for clarification directed at an adjudicating authority's order that has since been set aside by the Supreme Court, with the underlying applications revived, has become infructuous, and there is no justification for proceeding with it.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Ishrat Ali ...Appellant
Versus
The Registrar, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Mr. Ashish Choudhury and Mr. Dhruv Surana, Advocates. For Respondent:
ORDER
(Virtual Mode)
13.04.2022: This Appeal has been filed against order dated 01.09.2021
passed by the Adjudicating Authority by which the MA No. 3592/2019 filed by
the applicant has been rejected. The MA No. 3592/2019 was filed by the
Corporate Debtor for clarification in uploading the order passed by the
Adjudicating Authority dated 23.09.2019 by which the Application under
Section 7 was admitted. Against the said order an Appeal was filed before the
Hon'ble Supreme Court being Civil Appeal No. 2209/2020 in which the
Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 09.08.2021 has disposed of the
Appeal by setting aside the order dated 23.09.2019 passed by the Adjudicating
Authority and the applications were revived before the Adjudicating Authority.
2. By MA. No. 3592/2019, the Corporate Debtor sought to raise issues
regarding uploading of order dated 23.09.2019 which has already been set
Cont'd.../ -2-
aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and application under Section 7 and other
applications have been revived.
3. In view of the above, we see no justification in proceeding with matter
regarding clarification on uploading of order dated 23.09.2019. The order
dated 23.09.2019 having been set aside is no more in existence and there was
no requirement of clarification on uploading of the said order. We are of the
view that the Adjudicating Authority has rightly rejected the I.A. as it has
become infructuous. We dismiss the Appeal accordingly.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical)
[Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 372 of 2022
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