Pelican Grand Motels Private Limited vs Punjab National Bank
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.552 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an Adjudicating Authority has closed a corporate debtor's right to file a reply to a Section 7 application on the ground that the reply, though filed, remains under scrutiny with defects uncured, but the reply and the financial creditor's rejoinder are already on record, the Tribunal may set aside the order admitting the application and direct a fresh hearing that takes the filed reply and rejoinder into consideration, rather than leave the corporate debtor to a further remedy.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Pelican Grand Motels Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Punjab National Bank ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Abhishek Gwain, Advocate. For Respondent: Mr. S. K. Sharma, Ms. Dyuti Ghai, Advocates.
ORDER
30.05.2023: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant as well as learned
counsel appearing for the Respondent. This Appeal has been filed against the
order dated 28.02.2023 by which order the Adjudicating Authority has
admitted the Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor.
2. Application under Section 7 was filed by the Punjab National Bank in
which the Adjudicating Authority passed an order on 06.01.2023 closing the
right of the Appellant to file reply and the orders were reserved. The order
passed on 06.01.2023 is as follows:
"ORDER
Today, when the matter was heard, Mr. S.K. Sharma, Ld. Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Abhishek Gusain, Ld. Counsel for the respondent appeared. Notice was issued to the respondent on 17.10.2022. After service, it appears that the
Cont'd.../ -2-
respondent has filed reply and served it on the petitioner's counsel but the copy of the same has not been filed before the NCLT and when the query was raised to the counsel as to whether there is a date on which the reply was filed to the section 7 petition, he is unable to give a date or proof of the same to NCLT.
Ld. Counsel for the respondent informed us that the reply has been filed vide diary No. 0710102074302022 on 29.11.2022. We find from the DMS that it is still continues under scrutiny and the respondent has not chosen to rectify the defects so as to bring it on record. This shows the callous attitude on the part of the CD, as he is not defending the case hence we have no other option except to close the right of filing reply.
Arguments heard. Order reserved."
3. The Appellant was advised to file a Writ Petition under Article 226 before
the High Court. The High Court in the Writ Petition No. 2281/2023 and CM
Application No. 8267/2023 filed by the Appellant passed an order on
22.02.2023. Para 14 of the order of the High Court is as follows:
"14. Consequences of any order passed under section 7 of the IBC can be quite far reaching for any company. Accordingly, in the opinion of this Court, the Petitioner deserves an opportunity to defend its position. In the overall facts and circumstances of these case, it is directed as under.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.552 of 2023 -3-
i. The Petitioner's reply, which has been filed on 29th November, 2022, shall be placed on record before the NCLT which shall take up the matter for hearing on 15th March, 2023. ii. The Petitioner shall be given opportunity to make its submissions in respect of the petition under Section 7 of the IBC. Thereafter, the NCLT may proceed to pass orders in accordance with law.
iii. The present order shall be communicated by the Registrar General to the Registrar, NCLT in order to ensure that the Petitioner's interests are not adversely affected, due to any delay in communication."
4. The order of the High Court was sent by the Registry of the High Court,
which order of the High Court was not before the Adjudicating Authority when
matter was heard on 28.02.2023. It appears that the order was subsequently
received by the Adjudicating Authority and thereafter the Adjudicating
Authority fixed date in the matter as 15.03.2023. We have been informed that
the said date has also been adjourned to 29.08.2023.
5. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that when reply was filed by
the Appellant, copy of it was also received by the Financial Creditor and the
Financial Creditor has also filed rejoinder affidavit, the Adjudicating Authority
ought to have considered the reply specially when the High Court has passed
order on 22.02.2023.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.552 of 2023 -4-
6. Learned counsel for the Respondent submits that the order of the High
Court was not even before the Adjudicating Authority when order was passed
on 28.02.2023, therefore, there is no error in the order admitting application
under Section 7.
7. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties
and perused the record.
8. From the sequence of events which has been brought on the record it
does appear that reply was filed by the Corporate Debtor on 29.11.2022 which
continued to be under scrutiny as per DMS, as noted in order dated
06.01.2023. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that there are certain
minor defects in the reply which Appellant was always ready to rectify. It is
submitted that the High Court has passed the order on 22.02.2023 when the
Appellant directly approached the High Court in a Writ Petition. Their being
statutory need, the Appellant should have filed appeal, if any, against the
order dated 06.01.2223 of the Adjudicating Authority, before this Tribunal.
9. Looking into the fact and circumstance of the present case, we are of
the view that ends of justice be served in directing the Adjudicating Authority
to consider the reply which was filed by the Appellant on 29.11.2022,
especially when the Financial Creditor has already filed it rejoinder. The
Adjudicating Authority passed the impugned order without taking into
consideration the reply which has already filed on 29.11.2022 but laying in
defect.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.552 of 2023 -5-
10. Learned counsel for the Appellant undertakes before us that defects
shall be cured within two weeks from today.
11. The reply and rejoinder being already on the record, ends of justice be
served in setting aside order dated 28.02.2023 and reviving Section 7
application before the Adjudicating Authority to be heard afresh taking into
consideration the reply as well as rejoinder filed by the Financial Creditor. Let
a copy of this order be produced before the Adjudicating Authority by the
Appellant within one week from today. Within a further period of two weeks'
defects shall be cured by the Appellant, as undertaken. Let the Section 7
application be listed before the Adjudicating Authority on 03.07.2023, on
which date the Adjudicating Authority may consider the application as well
as reply and rejoinder and take decision in accordance with law, as early as
possible. Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.552 of 2023
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