Madhya Gujarat Vij Company Ltd & Anr vs Mohsinali Anvarali Varteji & Anr

IN THE MATTER OF: Madhya Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. & Anr. ...Appellants Versus Mohsinali Anvarali Varteji & Anr. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Pradeep Misra, Mr. Manoj Kumar Sharma, Mr. Anupam Misra, Advocates. For Respondents : Mr. Dhaval Deshpande, Advocates for R1 and R2.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

03.04.2025: Heard counsel for the Appellant as well as counsel for the

Respondent.

2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 23.01.2025 passed

by the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench by which in IA No.

3292 of 2024 filed by the Successful Auction Purchaser has been allowed.

The corporate debtor has been directed to be liquidated and in the liquidation

proceedings the respondent herein emerged as Successful Auction Purchaser.

Auction was completed on 06.10.2023 after the auction the Auction

Purchaser/ respondent filed an application on 13.04.2024 in which the

following prayers were made:-

"The present Interlocutory Application has been filed by the Applicant seeking following reliefs:

a. Direct the Respondent No. 7 and 8 to record the release of all charges over the Auction Property being Land·& Building at Survey No. 82 84, 85, and Ill located at Nurpura, Village Baska, Baska Halo/ Road, Tai -Halo/, Panchmahal 389 350. b. Direct the Respondent No. 1 and 2 to restore electricity connection at the Auction property being Land & Building at Survey No. 82 84, 85, and Ill located at Nurpura, Village Baska, Baska Halol Road, Tal - Halol, Panchmahal 389 350.

c. Any other order that this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of this case."

3. The Adjudicating Authority by the impugned order allowed prayer-b

that is a direction to the appellant to restore an Electricity Connection at the

auctioned property. Aggrieved by the said order the appellant has filed this

appeal.

4. Ld. Counsel for the appellant challenging the order submits that the

order of the Adjudicating Authority is without jurisdiction he has placed

reliance on the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gujarat Urja Vikas

Nigam Ltd. Vs. Mr. Amit Gupta & Ors. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant has

relied on ground-C which is as follows:

"C. Because in view of laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. Vs. Mr. Amit Gupta & Ors. reported in (2021) 7 SCC 209 the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority were not maintainable. The relevant Para 72 of the said judgment is as follows:

"74. Therefore, we hold that the RP can approach NCLT for adjudication of disputes that are related to the insolvency resolution process. However, for adjudication of disputes that arise dehors the insolvency of the corporate debtor, the RP must approach the relevant competent authority. For instance, if the dispute in the present matter

2 of 4 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 487 of 2025 related to the non-supply of electricity, the RP would not have been entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of NCLT under IBC. However, since the dispute in the present case has arisen solely on the ground of the insolvency of the corporate debtor, NCLT is empowered to adjudicate this dispute under Section 60(5)(c) of IBC."

5. Ld. Counsel for the respondent refuting the submissions contend that

the issues raised by the in the appeal is fully covered by judgment of this

Tribunal in CA (AT) (Ins) No. 346 of 2023, M/s Uttarakhand Power Corporation

Limited (UPCL) v/s M/s Shyam Baba Developers & Builders Pvt. Ltd. where

directions issued by the Adjudicating Authority directing for Electricity

Connection has been up-held by the Appellate Tribunal. It is further

submitted by the respondent that the appellant has filed his claims in the

liquidation proceeding and as per the Section 53 the amount has already

been allocated.

6. We have considered the submissions made by the parties and perused

the records. There is no dispute that the respondent became the Successful

Auction Purchaser in the liquidation proceeding of the Corporate Debtor. The

appellant has already filed a claim in the liquidation proceeding and his claim

has been dealt with in the liquidation proceedings. The submission which has

been pressed by the Appellant is that the Adjudicating Authority has no

jurisdiction to consider the application filed by the Successful Purchaser.

Reliance has been placed in Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam (supra). There cannot

3 of 4 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 487 of 2025 be any dispute to the preposition laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court

that the 'adjudication of dispute that arise dehors the insolvency of corporate

debtor cannot be entertained.' The present is a case where application arose

of auction purchase arising out of the liquidation proceeding, hence is fully

covered by the Section 60(5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. We

thus are of the view that submission of the appellant cannot be accepted that

Adjudicating Authority has no jurisdiction to entertain the application. The

issues raised in the appeal is fully covered by the judgment of this Tribunal in

M/s Uttarakhand Power Corporation Limited. We thus are of the view that no

grounds have been made out in the appeal. Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) harleen/NN

4 of 4 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 487 of 2025