State Bank Of India vs Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1015 of 2019
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The order does not decide any question of law by reasoning from a stated principle. It disposes of the appeal by a procedural direction: the Committee of Creditors is permitted to consider any revised resolution plan within a stated period, and failing a filed plan within a week, the Adjudicating Authority is to take up the Section 33 application and pass appropriate orders. Its only reasons are the parties' submissions about the revision history and the change of bench, which the Tribunal records without articulating any governing principle. NO_RATIO: the order gives no reasoned principle of law; it is a case-management disposal of the appeal with timelines, resting on no stated legal rule.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
State Bank of India ...Appellant
Versus
Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Ms. Niharika Sharma and Mr. Akshit Kapur, Advocates
For Respondents : Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Senior Advocate Mr. Rashesh Sanjanwala, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shanik Bhatt, Mr. Parini Shah and Ms. Anushree Kapadia, Advocates Mr. Vivek Sibal and Mr. Rahul Sharma, Advocates for 2nd Respondent Mr. Abhijit Sinha and Ms. Sakie Jakharin, Advocates for impleading party
ORDER
18.11.2019 The Appellant - 'State Bank of India' is one of the member of
the 'Committee of Creditors'. It has challenged the order dated 6th September,
2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal),
Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad, which reads as follows:
"The parties are represented through learned counsels. On the request of the proposed Resolution Applicant,
the matter is adjourned.
List the matter on 25.09.2019."
The main plea taken by the Appellant is that the 'resolution plan' was
revised 5 times and the Adjudicating Authority adjourned the matter from time -2-
to time even after the impugned order. Till date, no final order has been passed.
Learned counsel for the 'Resolution Applicant' submits that the matter relates to
'Madhya Pradesh' for which 'Indore Bench' had been notified initially but there
was no Bench constituted and now the Hon'ble Members of the 'Ahmedabad
Bench' have been allowed to take up 'Indore Bench matters' at Ahmedabad.
Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the 'revised plan' has already
been filed, which may be considered by the 'Committee of Creditors'.
In the facts and circumstances, we allow the 'Committee of Creditors' to
consider the 'revised plan', if any, filed or is to be filed within a week. The
'Committee of Creditors' is allowed to consider the same within 2 weeks from the
date of this order or receipt of the 'revised plan' and in case the 'proposed
resolution plan' is not filed within a week, the Adjudicating Authority will take
up the application under Section 33 of the 'I&B Code' and pass appropriate order
in accordance with law
The appeal stands disposed of.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Member (Judicial)
[Justice Venugopal M.] Member (Judicial)
/ns/gc
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1015 of 2019
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