National Asset Reconstruction Company ... vs Wind World Wind Resources Development ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1419 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is dismissed for default or disobedience, and the record shows that the applicant had assigned the claim and filed the application in compliance with the defect-cure timeline, there is no default or disobedience on the applicant's part on which the application could have been rejected; the dismissal order is therefore liable to be set aside and the petition revived for decision in accordance with law.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: National Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Wind World Wind Resources Development Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Abhishek Anand, Ms. Smriti Ghuriwal, Mr. Jaiveer Kant, Mr. Hardik Khatri and Ms. Atika Chaturvedi, Advocates
For Respondent : Mr. Alok Dhir, Ms. Varsha Banerjee and Ms. Aishwarya Nabh, Advocates
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
12.09.2024 Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant as well as
Respondent.
This Appeal has been filed against order dated 18.06.2024 by which
order Adjudicating Authority has dismissed the Company Petition in default
and disobedience. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that there was
assignment in favour of the Appellant on 29.04.2024, thereafter, an
application was filed on 07.06.2024 in which defects were communicated only
on 18.06.2024 and after clearing the defects, it was filed on 20.06.2024 and
registry re-numbered the application on 24.06.2024.
It is submitted that the I.A. subsequently came to be listed on
25.06.2024 which came to be dismissed as infructuous. From the facts, which have been placed by Learned Counsel for the Appellant, which are supported
by filing the DMS record at page 237 of the appeal paper book, we are satisfied
that there was no default or disobedience on the part of the Appellant on
which this application could have been rejected.
We thus, are satisfied that sufficient grounds have been made out to
set aside the order dated 18.06.2024. Order is set aside. CP(IB)
No.150/AHM/2024 is revived including the I.A. No. 958 of 2024 which may
be decided in accordance with law.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) pks/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1419 of 2024 2 of 2
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