Rakesh Nayar vs State Bank Of India
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 270 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the Adjudicating Authority imposes costs on a personal guarantor for a short delay in filing a reply, the quantum of costs must be proportionate to the delay and the circumstances; a cost of Rs. 2.5 lakhs imposed for a delay of six days in filing a reply, where the personal guarantor had a physical copy ready at the hearing, is excessive and is accordingly reduced to Rs. 25,000.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Rakesh Nayar ...Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Aditya Madaan, Mr. Rahul Kapoor and Mr. G.P. Madaan, Advocates
For Respondent : None
With Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 271 of 2024
IN THE MATTER OF: Babita Nayar ...Appellant
Versus
State Bank of India ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Aditya Madaan, Mr. Rahul Kapoor and Mr. G.P. Madaan, Advocates
For Respondent : None
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
07.02.2024 Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 270 and 271 of 2024
These two Company Appeals have been filed by the personal guarantor
against whom impugned order dated 25.01.2024 has been passed directing
for payment of cost of Rs. 2.5 lakhs within three days in Application under
Section 95 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to 'Code') filed against the Appellant by the State Bank of India. The
Adjudicating Authority on 10.01.2024 granted one week time to the personal
guarantor to file response as a final opportunity. The Appellant's case is that
they had filed response on 24.01.2024. Adjudicating Authority on the delay
of 6 days has imposed cost of Rs.2.5 lakhs on the personal guarantors.
It is submitted that the Appellant were also carrying physical copy of
the Reply on the date of hearing and were also ready for him. Considering the
facts of the present case, especially that there was delay of only 6 days in filing
the reply we are of the view that imposition of cost of Rs.2.5 lakhs is excessive.
We are of the view that ends of justice will be served in reducing the
cost to Rs.25,000/- each. Learned Counsel for the Appellant are allowed 10
days' time to deposit the cost.
In result, the impugned order dated on 25.01.2024 in so far as it
imposes cost of Rs.2.5 lakhs is substituted by amount of Rs.25,000/-. The
Adjudicating Authority shall take the reply of the Appellant on the record
before hearing the application. Appeals disposed of accordingly.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Mr. Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) pks/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 270 & 271 of 2023 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