Rahul Suri vs Nitin Om Kothari & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 250 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Appellate Tribunal will not entertain an appeal against an interlocutory order by which the Adjudicating Authority merely takes on record a Resolution Professional's report under Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, where no ground for interference is shown; the appellant's objections to such a report are preserved for consideration when the Adjudicating Authority decides admission or rejection of the application under Section 100 of the Code.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 250 of 2023 IN THE MATTER OF: Rahul Suri ...Appellant
Versus Nitin Om Kothari & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Ms. Bani Dikshit, Mr. Addhan Khanna and Mr. Kishan Kumar, Advocates.
For Respondents : Mr. Monish Panda, Mr. Anmol Jassal Advocates Respondent No. 1 (RP)
ORDER
13.03.2023: Heard learned Counsel for both the parties.
This appeal has been filed against the order dated 10.01.2023 by which
the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai) has
taken report submitted by Resolution Professional on record. By an order dated
10.10.2022, Resolution Professional was appointed by the Adjudicating
Authority on an application filed under Section 95 of IBC. The Tribunal has
fixed 28th February, 2023 for further consideration.
We are of the view that no ground has been made to entertain the appeal
against the order dated 10.01.2023 by which only report has been taken on
record. It is always open for the Appellant to raise any objection against the
Report when the matter is considered under Section 100 IBC by Adjudicating
Authority for admission or rejection of the application.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant has not
filed any objection to the Report. The learned Counsel for the Appellant is
permitted to file Reply to the Report within two weeks.
With these observations, we dispose of the appeal.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) akc/nn
Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 250 of 2023 Page 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