Sh. Anil Kumar (Liquidator Of M/S. Pearl ... vs Sh. Prabodh Kumar Tewari & Ors
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 395 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority's refusal to direct a visit to a residence of a respondent to collect records, where the earlier attempt to recover documents from the corporate debtor's vacated registered office failed, is not shown to be erroneous; the appellate tribunal declines to interfere with such a discretionary procedural refusal. A liquidator's remedy against an adverse interlocutory refusal in liquidation proceedings lies in making submissions before the Adjudicating Authority, which is the forum in which the matter remains open, rather than in an appeal against the refusal.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 395 of 2023 IN THE MATTER OF: Anil Kumar Liquidator of Pixion Media Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant Vs. Prabodh Kumar Tewari & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant: Ms. Mayuri Raghuvanshi, Ms. Raghuvansh, Ms. Akanksha Rathore, Advocates For Respondent:
ORDER
12.04.2023: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant.
This appeal has been filed against the order dated 01.02.2023 by which IA
No. 4890/2020 filed by the Appellant has been rejected. The Appellant is a
liquidator who has earlier obtained an order of Adjudicating Authority on
21.01.2020 for assistance of the police to collect documents from the regd. Office
of the Corporate Debtor. It is submitted that no documents could be recovered
since the office was vacated, thereafter another application No. 4890/2020 was
filed by the Appellant seeking direction of the Adjudicating Authority to visit the
residence of R-1 to collect certain documents and records which has been
rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. From the order it is indicated that
03.05.2023 is fixed for hearing in the matter.
We do not find any error in the order of Adjudicating Authority refusing
the prayer in the application No. 4890/2020. We further notice that order of
liquidation was passed on 22.08.2019. More than three years have elapsed, the Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 395 of 2023 1 liquidation proceedings having not yet been closed. It is always open for the
Appellant to appear and make submissions before the Adjudicating Authority.
With these observations the appeal is disposed of.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
ss/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 395 of 2023 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