Trinity Alternative Investment ... vs Srei Equipment Finance Limited

IN THE MATTER OF: Chaitanya Vincom Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant Versus SREI Equipment Finance Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Gaurav Mitra, Ms. Akanksha, Mr. Chitresh Sarogi, Mr. T. Agarwal and Ms. Lavanya, Advocates.

For Respondent : Mr. Anirban Bhattacharya and Mr. Rajeev Chowdhary, Advocates.

WITH

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1890 of 2025 & I.A. No. 7353, 7354 of 2025

IN THE MATTER OF: Trinity Alternative Investment Managers Ltd. ...Appellant Versus SREI Equipment Finance Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant : Ms. Akanksha, Mr. Chitresh Sarogi and Mr. T. Agarwal, Advocates.

For Respondent : Mr. Anirban Bhattacharya and Mr. Rajeev Chowdhary, Advocates. ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

01.12.2025 :

I.A. No. 7354/2025 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1890/2025 & I.A. No. 6850/2025 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1743/2025

1. These are an applications praying for condonation of delay of 14 days

& 13 days respectively in filing of the appeal.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that authorised

representative of the appellant was not available hence delay was caused in

preparation and filing of the appeal. It was further stated that there was Pooja

vacations due to which some time was taken in preparation of the appeal.

Cause shown sufficient. Delay condoned.

I.A. No. 7353/2025 in Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1890/2025

1. This is an application praying for condonation of 18 days delay in

refiling of the appeal.

2. Sufficient cause has been shown for condonation of 18 days delay in

refiling of the appeal.

3. Refiling delay condoned.

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) Nos. 1743 & 1890/2025

1. These two appeals have been filed against the same order dated

01.09.2025 deciding I.A. No. 1835/KB/2023 & I.A. 1913/KB/2023 in C.P.

(IB) No. 294/KB/2021 respectively.

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) Nos. 1743 & 1890 of 2025 2 of 4

2. Appellants have filed the above applications before the adjudicating

authority praying for deletion of their name from I.A. No. 26/KB/2023 & I.A.

No. 271/KB/2023 filed under Section 66 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy

Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code').

3. Appellant's case before the adjudicating authority was that they are

third parties and they could not have been impleaded in the application. They

placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Gluckrich

Capital P. Ltd.' Vs. 'State of West Bengal & Ors.' reported in [2023 SCC

OnLine SC 1187].

4. Adjudicating authority heard the submission of the appellant as well as

the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent which

was continued by the financial creditor. The adjudicating authority after

hearing the parties had rejected the application observing that no case has

been made out for expunging the name of the applicant from the array of

respondent till final adjudicating is done in those Section 66 proceedings. The

above observation was made by the adjudicating authority in paragraph 40 of

the order which is as follows:

"40. Thus, for the parity of reasons, we are of the view that the applicants should not be allowed to be expunged from array of respondents till the final adjudication is done in those Section 66 proceedings."

5. The appeal has been filed challenging the said order.

6. We are of the view that adjudicating authority did not commit any error

in refusing to expunge the name of the applicant from the application under

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) Nos. 1743 & 1890 of 2025 3 of 4 Section 66. The above observation made in paragraph 40 that the expunction

cannot be done till the final adjudicating is done in those Section 66

proceedings clearly reserves the right for the applicant to make all

submissions at the time of final adjudication of the application.

7. In view of the aforesaid, we see no reason to entertain this appeal.

8. In view of the above, we do not find any ground to interfere with the

appeal.

Appeals are dismissed, however, the dismissal of the appeal shall not

preclude the appellant to raise all submissions on merits at the time of final

adjudication of Section 66 application.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) himanshu/md

Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) Nos. 1743 & 1890 of 2025 4 of 4