Uti Employees Sai Samruddhi ... vs Jayesh Sangharajka - Resolution ...
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 669 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a Resolution Plan has been served on an allottee of land on which the corporate debtor's development is being carried out, such an allottee, as a stakeholder whose rights are affected by the plan, is entitled to file objections to the Resolution Plan and to have those objections heard and decided by the Adjudicating Authority before it considers approval of the plan. An order of the Adjudicating Authority rejecting an applicant's interlocutory applications on the ground that the applicant has no locus to oppose the plan, and refusing possession, is not sustained as such where the applicant is entitled to be heard on the plan; the appellate remedy is therefore to grant the applicant an opportunity to file objections, with the objections to be decided on their merits and without being influenced by any observation in the impugned order.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 669 of 2023
IN THE MATTER OF: UTI Employees Sai Samruddhi CoOperative Housing ...Appellant Society Through its Secretary Vs. Jayesh Sanghrajka Resolution Professional of Ornate ....Respondents Spaces Pvt. Ltd. (CD) With Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 684 of 2023
IN THE MATTER OF: UTI Employees Sai Samruddhi CoOperative Housing ...Appellant Society Through its Secretary Vs. Jayesh Sanghrajka Resolution Professional of Ornate ....Respondents Spaces Pvt. Ltd. (CD) With
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No. 689 of 2023
IN THE MATTER OF: UTI Employees Sai Samruddhi CoOperative Housing ...Appellant Society Through its Secretary Vs. CoC of Ornate Spaces Pvt. Ltd. Jayesh Sanghrajka ....Respondents Resolution Professional of Ornate Spaces Pvt. Ltd. (CD)
Present:
For Appellant: Mr. Partho Sarkar, Advocate.
For Respondent: Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Tishampati Sen, Ms. Riddhi Sancheti, Mr. Dikshat Mehra, Mr. Chintan Gandhi, Ms. Tasmiya Taleha, Mr. Puneet Singh, Mr. Rishabh gupta,Advocates for R-1.
CA(AT) (Ins) No. 669, 684 & 689 of 2023 2
ORDER
Per : Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain (Oral)
04.07.2023: This order shall dispose of three appeals bearing CA(AT) (Ins)
No. 669 of 2023 in UTI Employees Sai Samruddhi Cooperative Housing Society
through its Secretary vs. Jayesh Sanghrajka Resolution Professional of Ornate
Space Pvt. Ltd., CA(AT) (Ins) No. 684 of 2023 in UTI Employees Sai Samruddhi
Cooperative Housing Society through its Secretary vs. Jayesh Sanghrajka
Resolution Professional of Ornate Space Pvt. Ltd. & CA(AT) (Ins) No. 689 of 2023
in UTI Employees Sai Samruddhi Cooperative Housing Society through its
Secretary vs. CoC of Ornate Spaces Pvt. Ltd. Jayesh Sanghrajka Resolution
Professional of Ornate Space Pvt. Ltd.
2. Counsel for the parties have submitted that earlier also similar three
appeals bearing CA(AT) (Ins) No. 755 of 2023, CA(AT) (Ins) No. 757 of 2023 &
CA(AT) (Ins) No.758 of 2023 were disposed of by giving liberty to the Appellant
therein to file objection to the Resolution Plan and the Adjudicating Authority
has been directed to hear them before passing any order in regard to its approval.
3. The order passed in CA(AT) (Ins) No. 755 of 2023, CA(AT) (Ins) No. 757 of
2023 & CA(AT) (Ins) No.758 of 2023 decided on 02.06.2023 is reproduced as
under:
"These three appeals have been filed by the same
Appellant challenging the orders passed by the
National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench - IV
in different IA's which were filed by the Appellants.
CA(AT) (Ins) No. 669, 684 & 689 of 2023 3
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 758 of 2023 has been
filed by the Appellant against the order dated
02.05.2023 passed in I.A. 651 of 2022. Company
Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 757 of 2023 has been filed by
the Appellant challenging the order dated 02.05.2023
passed in I.A. 2074 of 2022.
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 755 of 2023 has been
filed by the Appellant challenging the order dated
02.05.2023 passed in I.A. 2232 of 2022.
The Adjudicating Authority by the Impugned Order
has dismissed all the I.A's filed by the Appellant. The
Appellant aggrieved by the orders and filed the
Instant Appeals.
We have heard Learned Senior Counsel appearing on
behalf of the Appellant as well as Learned Counsel for
the Respondents. The Appellants submits that the
Appellants during hearing of the matter was served a
copy of the Resolution Plan, the Appellant being
allottee of the land on which development is being
carried out are entitled to raise objection to the Plan.
However, the Adjudicating Authority in its order dated
02.05.2023 while deciding the I.A. 651 of 2022 has
observed that Applicant has no locus to oppose the
Plan. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits
CA(AT) (Ins) No. 669, 684 & 689 of 2023 4
that the different I.A's have been filed by the
Appellant with object of delaying the process and the
Adjudicating Authority has rightly rejected their
Application. The prayer for giving possession to the
Applicant as was contained in I.A. 651 of 2022 has
been rejected. Since the possession was with the
Corporate Debtor and possession cannot be handed
over to the Appellant.
Learned Counsel for the Respondent have also
supported the orders passed in other I.A's and has
referred to the observations and findings of the
Adjudicating Authority.
Learned Counsel for Appellant in his Rejoinder
submits that the Appellant being stakeholders are
entitled to raise objection to the Resolution Plan. Since
their rights shall be affected by the Resolution Plan. It
is submitted by the Counsel for Appellant that the
Appellant shall be satisfied if the Appellant be given
an opportunity to file objection to the Resolution Plan
and they are heard by the Adjudicating Authority at
the time of consideration of the approval of the
Resolution Plan.
We are of the view that the Appellant be given an
opportunity to the file an objection to the Resolution
CA(AT) (Ins) No. 669, 684 & 689 of 2023 5
Plan, for which the Appellants are allowed two weeks'
time to file objection to the Resolution Plan. Reply to
the objections may also be filed within one week
further. The Application for approval of the Resolution
Plan being already filed pending the same shall be
considered by the Adjudicating Authority along with
the objections. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has
submitted that the Appellant has never been
obstructing the proceedings before the Adjudicating
Authority.
We are of the view that apart from the liberty which is
being given to the Appellant to file objections, the
order passed in other I.A's is upheld. However, we
make it clear that objections of the Appellant which is
to be filed as per order shall be decided on its merits
without being influenced with any observation if this
order or any observations made by the Adjudicating
Authority. With these observations, we dispose off all
the Appeals."
4. We have heard counsel for the parties and keeping in view of the fact that
counsel for the parties have made a prayer that the present three appeals may
also be disposed of in terms of the order passed in CA(AT) (Ins) No. 755 of 2023,
CA(AT) (Ins) No. 757 of 2023 & CA(AT) (Ins) No.758 of 2023 in UTI Employees
Sai Samruddhi Cooperative Housing Society vs. PNB Housing Finance Ltd & Ors
CA(AT) (Ins) No. 669, 684 & 689 of 2023 6
on 02.06.2023, the present appeals are hereby disposed of in terms of the order
passed in CA(AT) (Ins) No. 755 of 2023, CA(AT) (Ins) No. 757 of 2023 & CA(AT)
(Ins) No.758 of 2023 but with a rider that the Adjudicating Authority shall make
all endeavours to decide the objections as early as possible but preferably within
a period of three months from the date of filing of objections.
[Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain] Member (Judicial)
[Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical) Raushan/Ravi
CA(AT) (Ins) No. 669, 684 & 689 of 2023
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