Steamline Industries Ltd vs Tecpro Systems Ltd. & Anr

Steamline Industries Ltd. .Appellant

Vs.

Tecpro Systems Ltd. & Anr. ..Respondents

Present: For Appellant: - Mr. Aditya Tiwari, Advocate.

For Respondents:- None

ORDER

04.12.2017- Admittedly, 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' has

already been initiated against 'Tecpro Systems Limited' ('Corporate

Debtor) pursuant to an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency

and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as "I&B Code")

preferred by 'Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited' in

Company Petition No. (IB) 197(PB)/2017. In view of the order of

moratorium passed under Section 13 read with Section 14 of the 'I&B

Code', the Civil Suit (COMM) 123/2017 against the 'Corporate Debtor'

and Another pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi cannot

proceed.

2. In view of the order of moratorium, as the suit filed by the

Appellant is not proceeding, the Appellant filed an application before the

Contd/ -

company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 299 of 2017 -2-

Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal

Bench, New Delhi, to permit the Appellant to pursue the proceedings

pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Civil Suit (COMM)

123/2017. The Adjudicating Authority referring to Section 14(1) (a) of

the 'I&B Code' rejected the application preferred by Appellant with cost.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits

that the suit in question has been filed under 'Commercial Court Act',

therefore, the provision of the said Act will prevail over the 'T&B Code'.

However, such submissions cannot be accepted in view of Section 238

of the 'I&B Code', which reads as follows:-

"238. Provisions of this Code to override other laws.-

The provisions of this Code shall have effect, notwithstanding

anythinginconsistent therewith contained in any other law

for the time being in force or any instrument having effect by

virtue of any such law."

4. In the circumstances, no relief can be granted to the Appellant.

5. However, we make it clear that the impugned order passed by the

Adjudicating Authority on 9th October, 2017 or order passed by this

Appellate Tribunal will not come in the way of Appellant to claim the

amount, if due from the 'Corporate Debtor' by filing application before

the 'Insolvency Resolution Professional'. In such case, the 'Insolvency

Resolution Professional' and the 'Committee of Creditors' will consider

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 299 of 2017 -3-

the Appellant's application along with other claimants in accordance

with law. The appeal is dismissed with aforesaid liberty to the Appellant.

No separate cost.

(Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya) Chairperson

(Justice Bansi Lal Bhat) Member(Judicial) Ar/uk

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 299 of 2017