Vijaykumar J. Nair vs Mr. Divyesh Desai
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1372 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Appellate Tribunal holds that where an intervention or other application seeking relief is already pending before the Adjudicating Authority in the same insolvency proceedings, the Adjudicating Authority is not justified in directing the applicant to file a separate intervention application in another pending application; the two applications ought to be heard and decided together.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Vijaykumar J. Nair ....Appellant Vs. Mr. Divyesh Desai ...Respondent For Appellant Ms. Purti Gupta, Ms. Henna George, Ms. Ashmeet Arora, Advocates. For Respondent Mr. Kaustubh Prakash, Ms. Hita Sharma, Mr. Lavish Sharma, Advocates.
ORDER
18.10.2023: I.A No. 4930 of 2023: This is an application praying for
condonation of 6 days' delay in filing the Appeal. The ground taken in the
application is that the Application has been filed for certified copy on
11.09.2023 which has not been received so far. Cause shown sufficient to
condone delay. Delay is condoned. IA No. 4930 of 2023 is disposed of.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1372 of 2023:-
Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.
2. This Appeal has been filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating
Authority dated 30.08.2023 on IA No.2720 of 2023. The Application being IA
No.2720 of 2023 has been filed by the Appellant where various prayers have
been made with regard to reliefs pertaining to employees. Prayers are as
follows:-
2
"i) Not to reject the salaries of the applicants for period of stay of CIRP by Hon'ble Supreme Court;
ii) Not to reject the salaries of the applicants for the period commencing from 21st December 2019, the date on which RP informed the employees vide his email that all white collar employees to "go on leave without pay".
iii) Not to reject the salaries of the applicants for the period the registered office and place of work in Mumbai was sealed by RP w.e.f. 25.02.2020 unlawfully.
iv) To treat the unpaid salaries/dues of the applicants for CIRP period as part of CIRP cost;
v) to disburse the same forthwith, without any further delay and report compliance with the same to the Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority within a period of 15 days from the date of the Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority's order;
vi) Pass such further orders and/or directions as the facts and circumstances of the case may warrant."
3. The Adjudicating Authority while disposing of IA No.2720 of 2023
observed that since IA No.53 of 2022 has already been filed by the liquidator
where liquidator has prayed for some modification in the distribution,
Applicant in IA No.2720 of 2023 may file an Intervention Application in IA
No.53 of 2022.
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1372 of 2023 & I.A. No. 4930 of 2023 3
4. We are of the view that when IA No.2720 of 2023 has been filed and
already pending, there is no reason to direct the Appellant to file an
intervention application in IA No.53 of 2022. Both IA Nos. 53 of 2022 and 2720
of 2023 ought to have been decided and disposed of together. We, thus,
dispose of this Appeal observing that IA No.2720 of 2023 also be heard and
decided while deciding IA No.53 of 2022 after hearing the parties. We make it
clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the applications.
It is for the Adjudicating Authority to consider and decide it.
5. Appeal is disposed of.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
Anjali/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1372 of 2023 & I.A. No. 4930 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