Suyash Rajendra Chhajed Liquidator Of ... vs Respondents
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 503 of 2025
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority, when disposing of an application without a decision on its merits, must record reasons for doing so; an order granting liberty to file a fresh application that gives no reasons for that liberty cannot stand, and the Appellate Tribunal may set it aside and revive the application for fresh consideration on that basis.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Suyash Rajendra Chhajed, Liquidator of Yug Weave Tech Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
---- ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Devul Dighe, Advocate. For Respondents :
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
28.03.2025: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant. This Appeal has
been filed against order dated 31.01.2025 passed by the Adjudicating
Authority by which order IA (Dis.) No.1(AHM)2025 has been disposed of with
liberty to file fresh.
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the application ought
not to have been disposed of and the Adjudicating Authority could have
directed for dissolution pending the avoidance application. He has relied on
Regulation 44A of the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2016.
3. In facts of the present case, we are of the view that ends of justice be
served in reviving the application before the Adjudicating Authority to be
considered afresh. The impugned order does not indicate any reason for
giving liberty for filing fresh application. We set aside the order dated
Cont'd.../ 2
31.01.2025 and revive IA (Dis.) No.1(AHM)2025 before the Adjudicating
Authority for fresh consideration. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.503 of 2025
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