Randhiraj Thakur vs Jindal Saxena Financial Services Pvt. ...
- CitationCompany Appeal(AT)(Insolvency) No. 468 of 2018
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the corporate insolvency resolution process has been declared illegal and set aside in an earlier decision of the Appellate Tribunal, an order of liquidation that rests on that process cannot stand and must be set aside.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Randhiraj Thakur ...Appellant
Vs
M/s Jindal Saxena Financial ....Respondents Services Private Limited & Anr
Present:
For Appellant: Dr. U.K. Chaudhary, Senior Advocate with Ms. Gauri Rishi and Ms. Srishiti Juneja, Advocates
For Respondents: Mr. Himanshu Gupta, Advocate for Respondent No. 1 Mr. Satendra K. Rai, Advocate for Respondent No. 3
Ms. Amrita Singh and Anshyl Syal, Advocates for HDFC Ltd.
Mr. Sanjay Aggarwal- Liquidator
ORDER
05.10.2018 This appeal has been preferred by Randhiraj Thakur, Director
Mayfair Capital Private Limited against order dated 4th July, 2018 whereby the
Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New
Delhi passed the order of liquidation.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant brought to our notice the decision
of this Appellate Tribunal in Company Appeal(AT)(Insolvency) Nos. 32 & 50 of
2018 titled "Randhiraj Thakur Vs. Jindal Saxena Financial Services Private
Limited and Anr." wherein this Appellate Tribunal by Judgement dated 18th
September, 2018 held that initiation of 'corporate insolvency resolution process'
Company Appeal(AT)(Insolvency) No. 468 of 2018 Page 1 of 2 as illegal and set aside the same. As the 'corporate insolvency resolution process'
has been declared illegal and set aside, we have no other option but to set aside
the order of liquidation and therefore we set aside the impugned order dated 4th
July, 2018.
Appeal is allowed with the aforesaid observations.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Member (Judicial) Akc/Gc
Company Appeal(AT)(Insolvency) No. 468 of 2018 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