Mr. Suryakanta Acharya vs Punjab National Bank

Mr. Atulya Kumar Dash ...Appellant

Versus

Punjab National Bank ...Respondent

With

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.722 of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mr. Prashanta Chandra Ratha ...Appellant

Versus

Punjab National Bank ...Respondent

With

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.725 of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mr. Suryakanta Acharya ...Appellant

Versus

Punjab National Bank ...Respondent

With

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.726 of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF:

Smt. Lora Mitra Rath ...Appellant

Versus

Punjab National Bank ...Respondent -2-

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Saswat K. Acharya and Mr. Dhananjay B. Ray, Advocates. For Respondent: Mr. Ankit Raj, Mr. Piyush Beriwal and Mr. Rajnish Kumar, Advocates for PNB.

ORDER

30.05.2023: These appeals have been filed by the Personal Guarantors

challenging the order dated 09.05.2023 by which order on an application filed

by the Punjab National Bank, the Adjudicating Authority has appointed the

Resolution Professionals and granted him time to file report after serving a

copy to the applicant and the matter is directed to be listed on 30.05.2023.

2. Learned counsel for the Appellant challenging the order contends that

by the order dated 09.05.2023, the Adjudicating Authority has also

determined the question of limitation against the applicant although reply or

objection of the applicant were not filed by that time. He further submits that

Appeal was although filed on 22.05.2022 but since it was not heard, the

Appellant could not file its objections and documents before the Resolution

Professional.

3. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties

and perused the record. From Para 7 of the order it is clear that the

submission was advance by counsel appearing for the Personal Guarantor

that petition is barred by limitation. Due to the said submission, the

Adjudicating Authority entertained the submission and expressed a prima

facie view that application is not barred by time. The Adjudicating Authority

being conscious of the aforesaid fact, granted time to both the parties to

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.721, 722, 725 & 726 of 2023 -3-

submit their documents and their version before the Resolution Professional

for his examination.

4. We, thus, are of the view that observation made by the Adjudicating

Authority in the impugned order on the limitation is only a prima facie view

and may not be treated to be expression of opinion by the Adjudicating

Authority. The Adjudicating Authority shall consider the said issue afresh

after receiving the report and after considering versions of both the parties.

5. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that Appellant was not able

to file reply, document and their version. We permit the Appellant to filed

their documents and version within two weeks from today before the

Resolution Professional. The Resolution Professional after considering the

documents and versions may file an Additional Report since Report has

already been filed, as submitted by learned counsel for the Appellant.

6. In view of the aforesaid, we see no reason to interfere with the impugned

order. The Appeals are disposed of, subject to as above.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical) Archana/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.721, 722, 725 & 726 of 2023