Kamal Kumar Kandpal, Ex-Direcotor, ... vs Sanghvi Movers Ltd. & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 273 of 2018
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority cannot admit an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and pass consequential orders of moratorium and appointment of an Interim Resolution Professional where the corporate debtor was not served with the demand notice under Section 8(1) or with notice of the petition, so that the admission order is passed without the corporate debtor being heard and is liable to be set aside.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Kamal Kumar Kandpal, Ex-Director, Lepton Projects Private Limited & Anr. ...Appellant
Vs.
Sanghvi Movers Limited & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant: - Mr. Narendera N. Sharma and Ms. Prachi Gupta, Advocates.
For Respondents:- Mr. Nitin S. Tambwekar, Advocate for 1st Respondent. Mr. Hemendra, Advocate for 2nd Respondent.
ORDER
31.05.2018- Mr. Kamal Kumar Kandpal, Director of 'Lepton Projects
Private Limited'- ('Corporate Debtor') has preferred this appeal against
an order dated 9th April, 2018, passed by the Adjudicating Authority
(National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi in (IB)-
518(PB)/2017, whereby and whereunder, the application under Section
9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to
as "I&B Code") preferred by the 'Sanghvi Movers Limited' has been
admitted, order of 'Moratorium' has been passed and 'Insolvency
Resolution Professional' has been appointed.
Contd/-...........
-2-
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submitted
that no notice under Section 8(1) of the 'I&B Code' was served on the
'Corporate Debtor'. The impugned order dated 9th April, 2018 has been
passed without notice to the 'Corporate Debtor'.
3. He further brought to the notice of this Appellate Tribunal the
affidavit by dasti served by the 1st Respondent- 'Sanghvi Movers
Limited'- ('Operational Creditor') wherein he has stated that the
Respondents reached the office of Mr. Kamal Kumar Kandpal, the
Director of the 'Corporate Debtor' and found neither the 'Corporate
Debtor' nor their representative were occupying the premises. In spite
of the same, the Adjudicating Authority without hearing the 'Corporate
Debtor' passed the impugned order.
4. It is submitted that if the demand notice would have been received
in terms of Section 8(1) or notice of the petition would have been served
on the Appellant, they could have settled the claim. In fact, the amount
has been paid to the 'Operational Creditor'.
5. Mr. Nitin S. Tambwekar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the 'Operational Creditor' accepts that the notice could not be served on
the 'Corporate Debtor' and also accepts that the Appellant has paid the
amount in favour of the 'Operational Creditor'.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 273 of 2018 -3-
6. Mr. Hemandra, Advocate appears on behalf of the 'Resolution
Professional' submits that if the order is set aside then the Court should
ensure payment of fees and cost incurred by the 'Resolution
Professional'.
7. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the Appellant and not
disputed by the Respondent, we have no other option but to set aside
the impugned order. We accordingly set aside the order dated 9th April
2018 and allow the prayer.
8. In effect, order (s), passed by the Adjudicating Authority
appointing 'Interim Resolution Professional', declaring moratorium,
freezing of account, and all other order (s) passed by the Adjudicating
Authority pursuant to impugned order and action taken by the 'Interim
Resolution Professional', including the advertisement, if any, published
in the newspaper calling for applications and all such orders and actions
are declared illegal and are set aside. The application preferred by
Respondent under Section 9 of the I&B Code, 2016 is dismissed.
Learned Adjudicating Authority will now close the proceeding. The
'Corporate Debtor' (company) is released from all the rigour of law and
is allowed to function independently through its Board of Directors from
immediate effect.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 273 of 2018 -4-
9. The 'Corporate Debtor' will pay a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- in favour
of the 'Interim Resolution Professional' towards fee and another sum of
Rs. 37,000/- towards the expenses i.e. total of Rs. 1, 87,000/- within
15 days. The appeal is allowed with aforesaid observation and
directions. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there
shall be no order as to cost.
(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson
(Justice Bansi Lal Bhat) Member(Judicial) Ar/G
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 273 of 2018
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