M/S. Della Constructions Pvt Ltd vs Mis. Rei Agro Ltd. & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 35 of 2017
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal will not interfere with an order admitting a Section 9 application and imposing moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, at the instance of a third party affected by that moratorium, where the Adjudicating Authority has admitted the application and appointed an Interim Resolution Professional. A third party whose recovery proceedings are stayed by a moratorium under Section 14 is not thereby entitled to set aside the admission order; its remedy lies in the corporate insolvency resolution process, where, on the public announcement under Section 15 by the Interim Resolution Professional, it may file its claim as a creditor.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
09.05.2017 - The Appellant as third party has challenged the order dated 27th February 2017 passed by the 'adjudicative authority' Kolkata Bench in C.P. No. 73 of 2017 under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as I&B Code, 2016) whereby the 'adjudicative authority' being satisfied in terms of sub-section (5) of Section of the I&B Code, 2016, admitted the application and ordered moratorium and appointed the Interim Resolution Professional.
The main grievance of the Appellant is that the proceeding which was initiated at the instance of Appellant now stands stayed in view of moratorium order passed by the 'adjudicative authority'. The resultant effect is that the Appellant may be adversely affected in recovering the amount.
In the present case as the 'adjudicative authority' admitted the application under Section 9 of the I&B Code, 2016, we find no reason to interfere with the said order at the instance of the third party who are affected by the said order of moratorium passed in terms of Section 14 of the I&B Code, 2016. Further, as the Interim Resolution Professional (hereinafter referred to as IRP) is required to issue a public notice on corporate insolvency resolution process under Section 15 of the I&B Code, 2016, all the creditors, including the Appellant, may raise their claim before the IRP.
For the reason aforesaid, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. In the absence of any merit, the prayer is rejected. However, it will be open to the Appellant to apply and raise claim pursuant to the advertisement as may be published by the IRP.
The appeal stands disposed off.
(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson
(Mr. Balvinder Singh) Member (Technical)
Me
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