Vivek Goel vs M/S Pooja Finelease Ltd & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 152 of 2020
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a tribunal's order of disposal expressly reserves liberty to move it for recall upon a stated default, such as dishonour of settlement cheques or non-payment of CIRP costs, the tribunal may recall that order and revive the proceedings on being satisfied that the stated default has occurred. A party that has obtained or opposed such a disposal, and in reply to an application founded on the reserved liberty does not deny the default alleged, cannot defeat the application by raising grounds that are untenable or that serve only to delay the proceedings; the unrebutted default is sufficient to justify recall and revival.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Viveck Goel ...Appellant
Versus
Pooja Finlease Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant: Mr. M.P. Sahay, Ms. Awanitika, Mr. Sachin Kharb and Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocates.
For Respondents: Ms. Shivangi Ghosh and Mr. Rajendra Beniwal, Advocates for Akasa Finance Ltd. (Applicants in I.A. No.2316 of 2023).
JUDGMENT
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.
This Application has been filed by the Respondent to the Appeal,
Akasa Finance Ltd. (Formerly Known as Pooja Finlease Ltd.) praying for
recall of order dated 11.02.2022 passed in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.)
No.152 of 2020 by which Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of the
Corporate Debtor was set aside. The application has been opposed by the
Appellant who has also filed a reply to the application. Brief facts necessary
to be noticed for deciding this application are:-
Cont'd.../ -2-
(i) An application was filed by the Financial Creditor against the
Corporate Debtor - M/s Auto Needs (India) Pvt. Ltd. under section
7 claiming total financial debt of Rs.66,76,565/-, which
application was admitted by the Adjudicating Authority vide
order dated 20.12.2019.
(ii) Challenging the order dated 20.12.2019, Company Appeal (AT)
(Ins.) No.152 of 2020 (present appeal), has been filed by Viveck
Goel, the Suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor.
(iii) When the Appeal was taken on 30.01.2020, learned counsel for
the Appellant stated that the Financial Creditor has already filed
an application before the Adjudicating Authority for withdrawal
of the Section 7 Application.
(iv) Subsequently, on 11.02.2020, the order dated 05.02.2020
passed by the Adjudicating Authority permitting withdrawal of
Section 7 application was brought into notice of the Court. On
11.02.2020, this Court noticing the order of the Adjudicating
Authority dated 05.02.2020 that Section7 application has been
dismissed as withdrawn has set aside the order dated 20.12.2019
and released the Corporate Debtor from rigours of CIRP. Order
dated 11.02.2020 passed by this Tribunal is as follows:
"ORDER 11.02.2020 Heard Advocate - Shri M.P. Sahay for the Appellant-Corporate Debtor. Heard Advocate
I.A. No. 2316 of 2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.152 of 2020 -3-
Shri Rajendra Beniwal for Respondent No.1- Financial Creditor. The Advocate for Interim Resolution Professional was present on last date but is not present today. Counsel for Appellant submits at Bar true copy of Order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Court-VI) on 5th February, 2020 in IB-2340/ND/2019 which reads as under:-
"ORDER
Heard the submissions made by the counsel for the financial-creditor. Counsel for the corporate- debtor is present. Authorized Representative is also present and submitted that they have received 12 cheques towards full and final settlement of their claim. The application filed under Rule 11 of NCLT rules, 2016 is taken on record and the application is allowed as a consequence the petition filed under Section 7 stands dismissed as withdrawn, in exercise of powers conferred under Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016."
The True copy is marked 'X' for identification.
2. Counsel for Appellant states that in view of the Order passed by the Adjudicating Authority dismissing the Application under Section 7 as withdrawn, he may be permitted to withdraw this Appeal. The learned Counsel for Respondent agrees that such Order has been passed by the Adjudicating Authority and concedes that the Impugned Order may be set aside.
3. Considering Order passed by the Adjudicating Authority on 5th February, 2020, the Impugned Order is set aside.
I.A. No. 2316 of 2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.152 of 2020 -4-
4. The IRP/RP will submit particulars regarding CIRP costs and fees to the Adjudicating Authority and the Adjudicating Authority will consider the same and direct the Corporate Debtor to pay the same in time to be specified. The IRP (Interim Resolution Professional) will hand over the assets and records of the Corporate Debtor to the Board of Directors of the Corporate Debtor. The Corporate Debtor is released from all the rigours of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and is allowed to function independently through Board of Directors.
5. If the cheques issued are dishonoured or CIRP costs, or fees of IRP/RP are not paid, parties are at liberty to move this Tribunal to recall present Order.
The Appeal is disposed of accordingly."
(v) I.A. No.2316 of 2023 has been field by the Financial Creditor
relying on the liberty granted that if the cheques issued are
dishonoured or CIRP costs, or fees of IRP/RP are not paid, parties
are at liberty to mover this Tribunal to recall the order. The case
of the Applicant is that the Corporate Debtor has tendered 12
post-dated cheques starting from 05.03.2020. It is stated in the
application that not a single cheque out of 12 cheques was
honoured, which statement has been made in Para 6 of the
application.
(vi) Applicant in the application has also referred to I.A. No. 1124 of
2021 which was filed by the Applicant - Financial Creditor before
I.A. No. 2316 of 2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.152 of 2020 -5-
the Adjudicating Authority for revival of the Section 7 application
which application was initially dismissed by the Adjudicating
Authority on 10.11.2021 against which Company Appeal (AT)
(Ins.) No.103 of 2022 was filed by the Financial Creditor. This
Appellate Tribunal vide order dated 18.07.2022 has allowed the
Appeal and set aside the order dated 10.11.2022 and revived
Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor.
(vii) In the reply filed by the Appellant to the I.A. No.2316 of 2023, the
Appellant has stated that against the order passed by this
Tribunal on 18.07.2022, the Corporate Debtor has filed an appeal
being "Civil Appeal No.5896 of 2022, Auto Needs (India) Pvt. Ltd.
& Anr. Vs. Akasa Finance Ltd. (Formerly known as Pooja
Finelease Ltd.)", in which the Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued
notice on 23.09.2022. Learned counsel for the Applicant has
brought on record the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated
28.11.2023 by which Civil Appeal No.5896 of 2022 filed by the
Corporate Debtor has been dismissed.
(viii) As noted above, this application I.A. No.2316 of 2023 has been
filed on the strength of liberty granted by this Tribunal by order
dated 11.02.2020. Applicant's specific averment in the
application is that 12 post-dated cheques given by the Corporate
Debtor has been dishonoured.
I.A. No. 2316 of 2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.152 of 2020 -6-
(ix) The Appellant has filed a reply to the I.A. No.2316 of 2023 dated
06.09.2023. In the reply affidavit filed by the Appellant there is
no denial to the statement made in the application that 12
cheques given by the Corporate Debtor has not been
dishonoured. The Appellant, however, in the reply has stated
about appeal filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court being Civil
Appeal No.5896 of 2022 and has opposed the application.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the Applicant as well as learned
counsel appearing for the Respondent to the Application (Appellant herein).
3. After having heard learned counsel for the parties we are satisfied
that the Financial Creditor is entitle to revive the Company Appeal (AT)
(Ins.) No.152 of 2020 in view of the liberty granted by this Tribunal itself in
its order dated 11.02.2020. The cheques given by the Corporate Debtor
having been dishonoured, Appeal deserve to be revived. We, however,
notice that the Appellant has been opposing the Application on untenable
grounds and his only intent is to delay the proceedings. The sequence of
the events indicate that the Corporate Debtor did not honour the settlement
on basis of which Section 7 application was closed by the Adjudicating
Authority by order dated 05.10.2020 and thereafter on one or other pretext
has been delaying the proceedings.
4. In view of the foregoing discussion, we allow I.A. No.2316 of 2023,
recall order dated 11.02.2020 passed by this Tribunal in the present
appeal. The Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No.152 of 2020 is revived. We
I.A. No. 2316 of 2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.152 of 2020 -7-
make it clear that there is no interim order in this appeal in favour of the
Appellant. We allow this Application with cost of Rs.1 Lakh (Rupees One
Lakh Only) to be paid by the Appellant to the Financial Creditor within a
period of two weeks from today. I.A. No. 2316 of 2023 is allowed
accordingly. List the Appeal on 03.04.2024 for admission.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical)
NEW DELHI
1st March, 2024
Archana
I.A. No. 2316 of 2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.152 of 2020
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