M/S Religare Housing Development ... vs La Residentia Developers Pvt. Ltd
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1082 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority, when rejecting a Section 7 application that was filed pursuant to liberty granted by an earlier appellate order, must give specific reasons for the rejection; an order that merely refers to the earlier appellate order without stating reasons of its own is unsustainable and is liable to be set aside.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1082 of 2023 & I.A. No. 678 of 2024 IN THE MATTER OF: Religare Housing Development Finance ...Appellants Corporation Ltd. & Anr. Versus LA Residentia Developers Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Santosh Paul Sr. Advocate with Mr. Janender Kumar Chumbak, Ms. Radhika, Mr. Rohan Chaudhary Advocates. For Respondents : Mr. C.S. Gupta, Advocate for Corporate Debtor. Mr. Tarang Agarwal, Advocate for Intervener.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
20.12.2024: Heard counsel for the appellant, Ld. Counsel appearing for
the respondent and Ld. Counsel appearing for the intervener.
2. This appeal has been filed by Financial Creditor challenging the order
dated 26.05.2023 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi,
Court-2 in CP(IB) No. 84/ND/2023 as well as in IA- 2519/2023.
3. Brief facts necessary for deciding this appeal are that a Section 9
application was filed against the Corporate Debtor by the Single Pipes Private
Limited on which Company Petition (IB) No. 188/ND/2020 was registered,
which Section 9 application was admitted by Adjudicating Authority by order
dated 25.05.2022 against which order an appeal was filed being CA (AT)(Ins)
No. 704 of 2022 by Amrapali La Residentia Flat Buyers Association. The appeal
was allowed and order admitting Section 9 application was set aside. This appellate Tribunal has set aside the order dated 25.05.2022. In the said appeal
an IA was filed by the present Financial Creditor on which IA following
observations were made by this Tribunal in para-23:-
"23. In so far as two I.A.s filed by the Financial Creditors as noted above, we are of the view that it is always open to the Financial Creditor to take recourse to law as permissible to them for protecting their interest. At the instance of the Financial Creditors we are not inclined to permit the CIRP Process to go on in the facts of the present case as noted above."
It appears that subsequent the order of this Tribunal CP (IB) No.
84/2022 was filed by Financial Creditor seeking/ praying for initiation of CIRP
against the corporate debtor on ground of debt and default as claimed in part-4
of the application total debt amount claimed was Rs.28,96,90,167/-. In the
Section 7 application an IA- 2519/2023 was filed by RWA of LA Residentia
Developers Private Limited, which application was heard by the Adjudicating
Authority and while considering the said application Adjudicating Authority
noticed the order of this Tribunal dated 25.07.2022 and has rejected the
Section 7 application filed by the financial creditor being CP (IB)No.
84/ND/2023.
4. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the order passed by this
Tribunal dated 25.07.2022 arose out of proceeding under Section 9 initiation
by Single Pipes and the judgment of this Tribunal was not relevant for deciding
Section 7 application and the order impugned there is no other reason given
except referring to the order of this Tribunal dated 25.07.2022. Ld. Counsel for
the corporate debtor sought to defend the order relying on para-16 of the
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1082 of 2023 & I.A. No. 678 of 2024 2 of 3 judgment of this Tribunal dated 25.07.2022 and the order of Supreme Court
referred in to the order of this Tribunal.
5. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the
record. The order of this Tribunal dated 25.07.2022 was an order arising of
Section 9 application filed by Single Pipes in which proceeding liberty was
granted to present financial creditor in para-23 as noted above and financial
creditor has initiated Section 7 proceeding in pursuance of the liberty granted
which required consideration by Adjudicating Authority. Adjudicating Authority
while considering IA No. 2519/2023 and noticing the order of this Tribunal has
rejected the application without giving any specific reason for rejecting the
application. The order passed by Adjudicating Authority is unsustainable. We
thus set aside the order dated 26.05.2023 in so far it reject CP(IB) No.
84/ND/2023. In result the CP(IB) No. 84/ND/2023 is revived before the
Adjudicating Authority to be considered afresh and to be decided in accordance
with law.
6. We make it clear that we are not making any expression or any opinion
on the merits of application and it is to Adjudicating Authority to consider it
after hearing the parties. The appeal is disposed of.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) harleen/NN
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 1082 of 2023 & I.A. No. 678 of 2024 3 of 3
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