Mannoj Kumar Jain vs State Bank Of India & Anr

IN THE MATTER OF: Srigopal Choudhary ....Applicant

Vs.

Manoj Jain ....Respondent/Contemnor

Present: For Applicant: Mr. Kushal Bansal, Advocate For Respondent:

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

02.01.2024: This contempt application has been filed alleging violation of

the order dated 18.04.2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 932 of 2022.

Learned Counsel for the appellant relies on para 6 of the order which reads as

follows:

"6. Taking into consideration of the aforesaid facts including the OTS order issued by the SBI, the order dated 18.07.2022 is set aside. The CIRP proceedings are closed with the liberty to the Bank to make an application for revival if occasion so arises. With regard to fees of the IRP, Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits the Appellant shall sit with the IRP and shall pay the relevant dues of the IRP."

2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that in the last line of the

order appellant has submitted that Appellant shall sit with the IRP and shall -2-

pay the relevant dues of the IRP. It is submitted that IRP has sent two emails

communicating his dues which has not yet been paid.

3. When we looked into the order there is no such direction, violation of

which can be complained of, the statement was recorded that appellant shall

sit with the IRP and shall pay the relevant dues of the IRP.

4. We are of the view that no contempt can be alleged by the appellant in

the facts of the present case. There is no direction to make payment of any

particular amount or the fee as claimed by the appellant.

5. We, thus, are not inclined to entertain this contempt application.

Contempt application is closed. It is however open for the appellant to take

such remedy as available with regard to his fee.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

sa/nn

Contempt Case (AT) No. 33 of 2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 932 of 2022