TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (3) TMI 33
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....19 in MA.SR.No.811/2019 in CP/39/[IB]/CB/2-2018 under Section 60[5] of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 [in short ''IBC''] read with Regulation 13 of IBBI [Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons] Regulations, 2016 before the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench [in short ''NCLT, Chennai Bench]. (2)The NCLT - Administrative Appellate Authority, Chennai, vide impugned order dated 04.11.2019, in SR.No.1234/2019 in SR.No.811/2019 in CP/39/[IB]/CB/2-2018, has dismissed the said petition and granted liberty to the petitioner to avail the appellate remedy before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal [in short ''NCLAT'']. The petitioner, challenging the legality of the sai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the criminal prosecution in FIR No.344 of 2007, wherein this Court directed the 2nd respondent/Corporate Debtor to cooperate with the investigation. However, he did not cooperate with the same. (5)According to the petitioner, the 2nd respondent/Corporate Debtor is due and payable a sum of Rs. 50,08,53,301/- as on 3.05.2018 and therefore, had filed a Claim in Form - B before the 1st respondent - Resolution Professional. The petitioner also became aware of the fact that the proceedings under the IBC against the 2nd respondent / Corporate Debtor was initiated by M/s.Udhayaman Investments Private Limited and vide order dated 12.03.2018, NCLT, Chennai, had appointed the 1st respondent as the Insolvency Resolution Professional [IRP] and durin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uments submitted by them along with the claim and it was found that it could not be related to any entries in the Books of Accounts and relevant documents were also looked for in the records available with the 2nd respondent/Corporate Debtor. Even the entire office premises of the 2nd respondent/Corporate Debtor was also searched and some related files were found only during January 2019 and on verification of the same, that the revision petitioner, who claims to be the Operational Creditor was due and owes a sum of Rs. 2,20,99,178/- to the 2nd respondent/Corporate Debtor and no amount is payable to them in terms of the claim and the transaction for the supply of iron ore and its payments, are also duly reflected in the Books and records. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T/ Tribunal, in paragraph No.9 further observed that assuming recall power is inbuilt in the Code, hen also the concept of recall is exercisable only in the cases where order is passed without jurisdiction or fraudulently obtained and the same is not the case here. The NCLT/Tribunal further observed that it also lacks review jurisdiction and citing the said reasons, has dismissed the miscellaneous application. (11) Mr.S.R.Rajagopal, learned counsel assisted by Mr.M.Pradeep Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that despite availability of the voluminous records to substantiate the claim, the IRP/1st respondent herein has failed to exercise his jurisdiction vested in him and without looking into the relevant records, has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e interest of justice and in furtherance of the object of the Code, it is therefore, prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the order in IND/811/2019 dated 30.08.2019 of the learned Assistant Registrar of National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai and direct the Registry to number the Miscellaneous Application and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.'' (16)The NCLT/Tribunal, in the impugned order held that the said prayer virtually amounts to reversal/recall of the Resolution Plan and the same cause could be taken as a ground for filing an appeal under Section 32 of IBC and not by way of this applicati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the above cited decision for the reason that it is also a well settled position of law. (19)The revision petitioner, under the guise of filing a revision, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wants this Court to issue a positive direction to NCLT, Chennai Bench, to exercise its inherent power in a particular manner. In the considered opinion of the Court, it cannot issue a positive direction to NCLT, Chennai Bench, as to how it should exercise its inherent power. The NCLT/Tribunal also found that in real sense, the revision petitioner wants to recall of the Resolution Plan and the said cause could be taken as a ground for filing an appeal under Section 32 of IBC. Thus, there is an effective alternate remedy provided to the revi....