Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Oriental Bank Of Commerce vs Sidhartha Builhome Pvt. Ltd

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal3 December 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 has been dismissed for non-prosecution, and the applicant has shown sufficient cause for its non-appearance, the Adjudicating Authority's order may be set aside and the application restored to its original file, with the pleadings already complete and the respondent having appeared and filed its objection being relevant to the exercise of that discretion.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1191 of 2019 IN THE MATTER OF: Oriental Bank of Commerce ...Appellant Versus Sidhartha Builhome Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent Present: For Appellant : Mr. S.K. Sharma, Mr. Kailash Sharma and Mr. Sabhay Choudhary, Advocates For Respondent : Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocate

ORDER

03.12.2019 This appeal has been preferred by the Appellant - 'Oriental

Bank of Commerce' against the order dated 3rd September, 2019 whereby the

Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi. Court - III

rejected the application filed under Section 7 of the 'Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Code, 2016 (for short, 'the I&B Code') by the 'Oriental Bank of Commerce' for

non-prosecution with the following observations:

"Ld. Counsel for the petitioner is present. CA No.

578/C-III/ND/2019 has been filed under Rule 48 (2)

of NCLT Rules seeking for restoration of the Application

which was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order

dated 06.08.2019 as the reasons espoused by Ld.

Counsel for the Applicant/ petitioner in the said

Application is that due to heavy rain and massive

traffic jam, he was not able to be present before this

Tribunal which led to the dismissal of the main

Company petition for non-prosecution. However,

based on the reasons as narrated in the said -2-

application, we are not convinced as it is seen from

record of proceedings, Ld. Counsel for the Corporate

Debtor was present."

Heard Mr. S.K. Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Appellant and Mr. Prateek Gupta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

Respondent. We are satisfied that the Appellant has made out a case for the

restoration of the application which was filed by it. Further we have noticed that

the pleadings has also been completes and the Respondent having appeared and

filed its objection. In the circumstances, we set aside the impugned order dated

3rd September, 2019 and restore the C.P. No. (IB) - 717(ND)/2019 to its original

file of National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi. Court - III. The Adjudicating

Authority will now issue notice to the Respondent and fix the date 'for Admission'

of the application filed under Section 7. Parties will appear before the

Adjudicating Authority on 18th December, 2019 at 10.30 A.M. and bring this

order to the notice of the Adjudicating Authority.

The appeal is allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Member (Judicial)

[Justice Venugopal M.] Member (Judicial)

/ns/sk

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1191 of 2019

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