Kitply Industries Limited vs Srei Equipment Finance Limited
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1374 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority, when granting a corporate debtor time to file its reply at the first hearing after notice, is not required to impose costs; a direction imposing costs in that situation is set aside.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Kitply Industries Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
SREI Equipment Finance Ltd. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Mr. Sarthak Bhandari, Advocates. For Respondent : Mr. Sanjiv Sen, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Aditya Kanodia, Ms. Anjali Singh, Mr. Pragyan Mishra, Ms. Radha Gupta, Advocates.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
22.07.2024: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant and Shri Sanjiv
Sen, learned senior counsel appearing for the Respondent. This Appeal has
been filed against order dated 11.07.2024 passed by the Adjudicating
Authority by which the Adjudicating Authority while granting 10 days' time to
file Reply has imposed cost of Rs.25,000/-.
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant contends that the Applicant-
Financial Creditor has not filed the Business Transfer Agreement dated
16.08.2009 (19) along with the Application.
3. Shri Sanjiv Sen, learned counsel for the Respondent submits that the
objections which was raised by the Appellant were all frivolous objections and
advance notice was served still they did not file the Reply.
Cont'd.../ 2
4. Be that as it may. It is always open for the Corporate Debtor to raise
objection of non-filing of document in reply which is to be filed. It is further
submitted that 11.07.2024 was the first date after notice, when impugned
order imposing cost was passed. We are of the view that on the first day, the
Adjudicating Authority while granting time to file reply, it was not necessary
to impose cost of Rs.25,000/-. We, thus, while retaining the rest of the order,
delete cost of Rs.25,000/-.
5. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the time granted by the
Adjudicating Authority for filing Reply of 10 days has already expired,
however, next date in the matter is fixed on 25.07.2024.
6. We are of the view that Appellant may file Reply before the date fixed.
With these observations, the Appeal is disposed of.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1374 of 2024
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