Kishan Lal Sharma vs Vikram Bajaj
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency)No. 777 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appellate tribunal modified the impugned order and disposed of the appeal by granting the appellant one final opportunity to file a reply-affidavit within a fixed period, failing which the Adjudicating Authority is to proceed on the available records after hearing the appellant. The court does not state any general legal principle beyond this procedural disposition on the facts before it.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Kishan Lal Sharma .....Appellant Vs. Vikram Bajaj ......Respondent
Present : For Appellant: Mr. Ashutosh Gupta, Mr. Gaurav Rana, Mr. Abhishek Aggarwal, Advocates For Respondents: Mr. Abhishek Anand, Advocate
O R D E R
31.07.2019 - The Appellant - erstwhile Director of 'Anil Special Steel
Industries Limited' has preferred this appeal against order dated 13th June, 2019
passed by the Adjudicating Authority ('National Company Law Tribunal'), Jaipur
whereby Interlocutory Application was filed by the Appellant to set-aside the ex-
parte order passed by the Adjudicating Authority on 10th May, 2019 has been
rejected.
2. It appears that the Respondent moved before the Adjudicating Authority for
action u/s 45 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('I&B' Code, for short)
and the matter is pending for consideration.
....contd.
2
3. The Directors and another were noticed including the Appellant but
Appellant inspite of granting time failed to file reply-affidavit.
4. On 4th April, 2019, the Adjudicating Authority passed order imposing cost
of Rs. 5000/- on the Appellant to be paid in the 'Prime Minister National Relief
Fund'.
5. However, on 10th May, 2019 when the matter was taken up, the Appellant
was not presented before the Adjudicating Authority and failed to file any reply.
On 10th May, 2019, the Appellant's right to file reply was closed.
6. In this background, the Interlocutory Application was filed to set-aside the
order dated 10.05.2019 which was rejected by Adjudicating Authority on 13th
June, 2019.
7. Learned counsel for the Appellant submitted that Appellant was present on
10th May, 2019 along with the Counsel but the Counsel refused from appearance
and for the said reason, therefore, no reply could be filed.
8. It stated that application filed by 'Resolution Professional' for action u/s 45
of the 'I&B' Code is still pending for consideration.
9. Mr. Abhishek Anand, learned counsel appears on behalf of 'Resolution
Professional' accepts that no order has been passed by the Adjudicating Authority
on the application for action u/s 45 of the 'I&B' Code. ...contd. 3
10. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we give one opportunity to the
Appellant to file reply-affidavit by 9th August, 2019. If such reply is filed, it will
be open to the 'Resolution Professional to file rejoinder within a week thereof.
However, if no reply is filed by the Appellant within the aforesaid period, the
Adjudicating Authority will proceed without reply on the basis of available records
after hearing the Appellant.
11. The impugned order stands modified to the extent above.
The appeal stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations. No costs.
[Justice S. J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[Justice A. I. S. Cheema] Member (Judicial)
[Kanthi Narahari] Member (Technical)
ss/sk
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency)No. 777 of 2019
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