K. Srinivas Krishna vs Shyam Arora
- CitationCONTEMPT CASE (AT) NO.9/2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The order of 2 September 2021 remitted the matter to the Adjudicating Authority solely to decide the fees and costs of the CIRP payable to the Interim Resolution Professional by the Corporate Debtor; it did not set aside the Bank Guarantee or otherwise direct any relief beyond that remand, so a contempt petition alleging disobedience of that order cannot succeed where the impugned conduct falls outside the scope of the directions actually given.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH NEW DELHI CONTEMPT CASE (AT) NO.9/2022 IN COMPANY APPEAL (AT)(Ins) No.221/2021 In the matter of: Kodeboyina Srinivas Krishna Appellant Vs Shyam Arora & Anr Respondent
For Appellant: For Respondent: ORDER
VIRTUAL MODE 11.07.2022: Heard Mr. Neeraj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the
Appellant. The present petition has been filed on an allegation of wilful
disobedience of an order passed by this Appellate Tribunal dated 2nd
September, 2021. By the said order the matter was remitted back to the
Adjudicating Authority to decide the fees and cost of CIRP payable to the IRP
which was to be borne by the Corporate Debtor. On examination of the order
dated 2nd September, 2021 it is evident that while setting aside the order of
CIRP the matter was simply remitted to the Adjudicating Authority to the
extent to decide the fees payable to the IRP. Learned Counsel for the Appellant
argues that once the CIRP proceedings was set aside, there was no reason to
interfere with the Bank Guarantee. However, the Court is of the opinion that
the matter has been remitted back to the Adjudicating Authority to the extent 2
to decide the cost payable to IRP. If in any event the petitioner is aggrieved,
he would be at liberty to approach the Adjudicating Authority. We are of the
considered opinion that there is no case of violation of the earlier order. The
petition stands disposed off.
(Justice Rakesh Kumar) Member (Judicial)
(Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra) Member (Technical) Bm/gc
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