Manoj Arya vs Respondent
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1763 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
An application under Section 94 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 founded on a show cause notice for a penalty issued by the Central Excise authority, rather than on a notice of invocation of a personal guarantee by the creditor bank, is not maintainable as a petition of a default by the guarantor; the Adjudicating Authority is entitled to dismiss such a petition as a gross abuse of process where the guarantee was never invoked. Where an application is filed in the relevant year on the strength of a demand notice, and a claimed notice of invocation dated years earlier was never placed before the Adjudicating Authority, the Tribunal will not interfere with the dismissal of the application, since the claimed notice cannot be relied upon in appeal when it was not part of the record below.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Manoj Arya ...Appellant
Versus
--- ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Anuj Tiwari and Mr. Ayush Rajani, Advocates
For Respondent :
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
09.01.2025 I.A. No.6433 of 2024 This is an application praying for
condonation of 11 days delay in filing the Appeal. Sufficient cause has been
shown in paragraph 3 of the delay condonation Application. Delay is
condoned.
This Appeal have been filed against the order dated 14.06.2024 passed
by National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Court-II in CP(IB)/
145(MB)/2024 filed by the Applicant under Section 94 of the Insolvency and
Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Adjudicating Authority in paragraph 7 has observed
that:
"....
7. From a perusal of the averments made in the application, it transpires that the personal guarantee given by the Applicant in favour of the Bank of India was never invoked nor any invocation notice has been placed on record. The instant Petition under Section 94 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 has filed on the basis of a show cause notice dated 30.11.2011 issued by the Central Excise imposing a penalty of Rs. 30,00,000/- upon the Applicant. In these circumstances, in our considered view, when the guarantee is not shown to have been invoked by Bank of India at any point of time, the present Petition under Section 94 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 could not have been filed on the basis of the notice issued by the Central Excise or any other Authority. We are further of the considered view that the present Petition, on the face of it, is not maintainable and seems to have been filed for some ulterior purpose which is nothing but a gross abuse of the process of law. Therefore, we dismissed this Petition under Section 94 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with a cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- which shall be recovered from the Applicant. File be closed and consigned to records."
Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that only reason given by
the Adjudicating Authority is that guarantee has never been invoked by the
Bank whereas, on 15.06.2015 a notice was issued by the bank in which
Appellant was also mentioned at serial number 2, hence, the finding is not
correct. It is further submitted that OA has also been filed by the Bank.
Learned Counsel for Appellant, however, submits that the said notice
was not brought on the record before the Adjudicating Authority. We have
considered submission of Counsel for the Appellant and perused the record.
In the Application, which was filed by the Applicant show cause notice
dated 30.11.2011 issued by Central Excise imposing a penalty of
Rs.30,00,000/- was relied and Adjudicating Authority rightly referring to the
said notice has held that no case has been made out to entertain the
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1763 of 2024 2 of 3 application. Submission of the Appellant that notice was issued on
15.06.2015 which notice was never filed before the Adjudicating Authority
also does not commends us to find any fault with the order of the Adjudicating
Authority. Given that the Application has been filed by the Applicant in year
2024 and the said notice is claimed to be issued on 15.06.2015, the
application was not entertainable. We do not find any good ground to
entertain this Appeal.
Appeal is dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) pks/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1763 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