Varun Patwari vs Indian Bank
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 507 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's order rests on a single point of law, following the Supreme Court's decision in Dilip B. Jiwrajka v. Union of India: the constitutionality of Section 95 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is upheld, so proceedings under Section 95 must continue in accordance with law, with any adjudication taking place at the stage of Section 100, and a debtor aggrieved by the Resolution Professional's report may file objections at that stage. Because that remedy is available, no appeal lies against the appointment of the Resolution Professional at this interlocutory stage, and the appeal is disposed of on that basis.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Varun Patwari ...Appellant(s)
Versus
Indian Bank ...Respondent(s)
Present: For Appellant : Mr. S.K. Singhi, Mr. Ankur Singhi, Mr. Akshay Singhi, Ms. Sindhuja Rastogi, Advocates. For Respondents :
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
21.03.2024: Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant. Sufficient cause
shown. Delay in filing the present appeal is condoned. This appeal is filed
against the order dated 19.12.2023 passed by the Adjudicating Authority
(National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata) in CP (IB)/182
(KB) 2023. By which order, the Adjudicating Authority has appointed
Resolution Professional in application filed under Section 95 of the IBC.
Aggrieved by the said order, the Appellant has come up in this appeal.
In view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of 'Dilip B Jiwrajka v Union of India' upholding the
constitutionality/validity of Section 95 qua, consequence of which is that
proceedings under Section 95 has to be proceeded in accordance with law and
adjudication is to take place at the stage of Section 100. It is open for the
Appellant to file objection to the report of the Resolution Professional. -2-
In view of the aforesaid, we see no reason to entertain the Appeal. With
the above observations, the Appeal is disposed of.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)
R.N./N.N.
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