Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Sheena Adarsh vs Union Bank Of India & Anr

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal29 March 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where a corporate debtor has in fact been given notice of an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and has appeared through counsel who are heard before admission, the contention that the application was admitted without notice to the corporate debtor cannot be sustained. Operational creditors, whose claims are to be considered by the Resolution Professional once the corporate insolvency resolution process has been initiated, have no right to be heard at the stage of admission of an application under Section 7 of the Code.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 690 of 2018IN THE MATTER OF:Sheena Adarsh ...AppellantVersus

Union Bank of India & Anr. ...Respondents

With Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.742 of 2018

IN THE MATTER OF:

Mr. Sheeju Purushothaman ...Appellant

Versus

Union Bank of India & Anr. ...Respondents

For Appellant : Mr. Baalaji, Mr. Teack Raj, Mr. Karuppaiah Meyyappan Advocates

For Respondent : Mr. Avrojyoti Chatterjee, Mr. Rajiv S. Joy, Mr. Abhijit Roy and Ms. Jayasree Sama Advocates for Respondent No. 1

ORDER

29.03.2019 These appeals have been preferred by the Appellants -

Shareholders against the order dated 1st November, 2018 passed by the

Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) Chennai Bench,

Chennai admitting the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and

Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("I&B Code" for short) filed by the Respondent -

'Union Bank of India'- ('Financial Creditor'). 2

2. Learned counsel for the Appellants submitted that the 'Corporate

Debtor' is a Public Limited Company and there are about 24000 shareholders

apart from the employees about 2000 families are dependent on the 'Corporate

Debtor'. It is also submitted that the Adjudicating Authority admitted the

application without notice to the 'Corporate Debtor'.

3. However, the aforesaid submissions cannot be accepted as admittedly

notice was issued to the 'Corporate Debtor' and the Senior Advocate along

with another Advocate appeared on behalf of the 'Corporate Debtor' and they

were heard.

4. Learned counsel for the Respondents submits that the counsel for the

'Corporate Debtor' appeared on eleven occasions before the Adjudicating

Authority thereafter on hearing them the order was passed.

5. So far as the claims of the 'Operational Creditors' are concerned, their

claim will be considered by the 'Resolution Professional' once admitted.

Otherwise, they have no right to be heard at the time of admission of the

application under Section 7 of the 'I&B Code'.

6. For the reasons aforesaid, we are not inclined to interfere with the

impugned order dated 1st November, 2018. The Adjudicating Authority is

expected to complete the 'Resolution Process' in accordance with law within

the stipulated period. The 'Resolution Professional', the 'Committee of

Creditors' will co-operate to ensure that the resolution process succeeds.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 690 & 742 of 2018 3

Both the appeals stand disposed of with aforesaid observations and

directions. No cost.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[Justice A.I.S. Cheema] Member (Judicial)

/ns/sk/

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 690 & 742 of 2018

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