Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Wiztown Planners Private Limited vs Vistra Itcl (India) Limited

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal22 March 2023Ashok Bhushan

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The appellate tribunal declined to entertain an appeal against an interim restraint order passed before admission of a Section 7 application, holding that no ground was made out to entertain the appeal at that stage, where the Adjudicating Authority had already fixed a next date of hearing and the appellant could seek a hearing before that authority if settlement failed.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 259 of 2023

IN THE MATTER OF: Wiztown Planners Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant

Versus Vistra (ITCL) India Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Anupam Lal Das, Sr. Advocate with Mr. A.K. Prasad, Mr. Sinha Shrey Nikhilesh, Mr. Nayan Dubey, Md. Faraaz Kha, Advocates

For Respondent : Mr. Abhijeet Sinha, Mr. Udit Mendiratta, Ms. Niharika Sharma, Mr. Tejas Jha and Mr. Saikat Sarkar, Advocates

ORDER

22.03.2023: Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. This appeal has been filed against an order dated 13.02.2023 by which

the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT, Allahabad) before admission of Section 7

application, passed an order retraining Corporate Debtor from alienating or

creating any third party interests/rights on the assets of the Corporate Debtor

secured in favour Debenture Trustee till further orders.

3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the order was passed

only on the ground that certain information was not provided by the Appellant

to the Debenture Trustee. It is stated that the Appellant is ready to provide

information to the Debenture Trustee and also submitted an One Time

Settlement (OTS) proposal to the Debenture Trustee.

4. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that in the present matter,

in Section 7 Notice was issued in October, 2022, Reply by the Corporate Debtor

could be filed by 01.03.2023 and the next date has been fixed on 10.04.2023.

5. We are of the view that since the Tribunal has already fixed 10.04.2023

as the next date of hearing, it is appropriate that the Appellant may request the

Adjudicating Authority to hear the Application, in the event the settlement is

not reached as contended by the Counsel for the Appellant.

6. We are, thus of the opinion that no ground has been made out to

entertain the appeal at this stage. We further note the submissions of the

Appellant that the order impugned does not restrain the Appellant from taking

steps in bringing relevant investments without creating 3rd Party interest which

has already been restrained by the Adjudicating Authority.

With these observations, we dispose of the appeal.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) akc/nn

Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 259 of 2023 Page 2 of 2

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