Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Surendra Singh Hada & Ors vs Arfat Petrochemicals Pvt Ltd

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal16 February 2021

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Adjudicating Authority is bound by the timelines prescribed under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and must dispose of a pending application with utmost expedition; a delay of the kind shown here, exceeding the prescribed period, is a disturbing trend that the Appellate Tribunal must curb by directing expeditious disposal and requiring compliance to be reported.

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

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 93 of 2021In the matter of:

Surendra Singh Hada & Ors. ....Appellant Vs. Arfat Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. ....Respondent Present: Appellants: Mr. Pankaj Jain, Mr. Aman Shankar, Advocates. Mr. Habib Khan (AR) Respondent:

ORDER

(Through Virtual Mode)

16.02.2021: Application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and

Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("I&B Code" for short) is pending consideration before

the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Ahmedabad

bench, Court No.1, for more than 840 days transcending the prescribed time

limit. This is a disturbing trend and needs to be curbed.

2. After hearing Mr. Pankaj Jain, Advocate representing the Appellant, we

deem it appropriate to dispose off this appeal with direction to the Adjudicating

Authority to ensure that the provisions of the 'I&B Code' in regard to timelines

are adhered to scrupulously and all endeavors be made to dispose off the

matter pending before it with utmost expedition preferably within four weeks.

Compliance shall be reported to this Appellate Tribunal.

Contd/-..........

-2-

Copy of the order be communicated to the Adjudicating Authority

forthwith.

[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Acting Chairperson

[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical)

AR/g

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 93 of 2021

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