Sidhartha Global Private Limited vs M/S Amira Pure Foods Pvt Ltd

IN THE MATTER OF: Sidhartha Global Pvt. Ltd. ....Appellant

Vs.

Amira Pure Foods Pvt. Ltd. ....Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Shiv Mangal Sharma, Mr. Saurabh Rajpal, Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocates For Respondent: Ms. Swaralipi Deb Roy, Mr. R. K. Gupta, Advocates

ORDER

10.07.2023: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant. The delay in filing

the appeal is condoned.

This appeal has been filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating

dated 06.10.2021 by which order CA No. 906/2019 filed by the Appellant has

been dismissed.

3. The Adjudicating Authority noticed that no one appears to press the

application and the subject premises was handed over to the Applicant on

17.11.2020. It was also observed by the Adjudicating Authority that the

agreement was terminated prior to commencement of CIRP. Adjudicating

Authority observed that Adjudicating Authority has gone through the prayers

and in the given facts, the prayers cannot be acceded to and the application is

dismissed.

4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant challenging the order submits that it is

true that the Counsel for the Applicant was not present before the Adjudicating

Authority but the rejection of the application was not required. It is submitted

that when it is admitted that premises have been handed over to the Applicant

on 17.11.2020 and CIRP commenced on 11.12.2018, the Appellant was entitled

for its rent.

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 585 of 2022 1

5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant further submits that the liquidator has

admitted the claim of the Appellant to the extent of Rs. 1,06,59,332/- in wake of

admission of part claim, rejection of application was not required.

6. Learned Counsel appearing for the liquidator submits that the Applicant

was not entitled to the relief as prayed in the application.

7. We have considered the submission of the Learned Counsel for the parties

and peruse the record.

8. The prayers which were made in the application filed by the Appellant are

to the following effect: -

"(a) Direct the Resolution

Profession of the Corporate Debtor to

immediately pay monthly damages /

compensation / Occupation charges of Rupees

24,63,237 - (Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs Sixty

Three Thousand Two Hundred and Thirty Seven

only) in terms of clause 29(f) of the least Lease

Deed, from the date of commencement of

Insolvency Resolution Process i.e. 11.12.2018 till

July, 2019, total of which comes to Rupees

1,97,05,896/- (Rupees One Crore Ninety Seven

Lacs Five Thousand Eight Hundred and Ninety

Six only) and further till the completion of entire

Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process @

Rupees 24,63,237/- (Rupees Twenty Four Lakhs

Sixty Three Thousand Two Hundred and Thirty

Seven only) per month; and/or

(b) Include the aforesaid sum in the

Insolvency Resolution Process Costs in terms of

Rule 31(b) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 585 of 2022 2 Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for

Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016.

(c) pass such other order/directions as

this Hon'ble Bench may deem fit and proper in

the facts and circumstances of the case."

9. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has also pointed out to the letter of the

liquidator by which liquidator has communicated on 14.05.2020 that the

liquidator has admitted the claim to the extent of Rs. 1,06,59,332/-. The

Adjudicating Authority's only observations made while rejecting the application-

'we have gone through the prayers, in the given facts and circumstances

of the case the prayers cannot be acceded to and, therefore, the application is

dismissed."

10. We are of the view that when the Adjudicating Authority proceeded to

decide the application on merits, the application ought to have been considered

on merits considering the claim of the Appellant and other materials on record.

Rejection of the application by the above observations cannot be sustained.

11. The orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority dated 06.10.2021

deserves to be set aside and CA No. 906/2019 is revived before the Adjudicating

Authority to be considered afresh. We make it clear that we are not making any

observations on merits of the application and it is for the Adjudicating Authority

to consider the application afresh and pass appropriate orders. The appeal is

disposed of accordingly.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

ss/nn Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 585 of 2022 3