TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 1464
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....using loan facility of Rs. 1,06,20,000/- sanctioned by the Financial Creditor to the Corporate Debtor is not denied. Further, it is also averred that the property which was mortgaged to the Financial Creditor in relation to the above said loan amount has been repossessed by the Financial Creditor after the account being declared as a non-performing asset (NPA) under the provisions of Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and that the applicant/ Corporate Debtor was under a belief that the mortgaged property has been sold and the proceeds had been appropriated as against the loan amount due from the Corporate Debtor. While so, from the non-applicant and thereafter learned RP appointed by this Tribunal, namely, Mr. Kamal Jain it came to know that CIRP has been initiated against the applicant/ Corporate Debtor on 25.03.2019 and upon coming to know of the same, this application has been filed on 09.04.2019 for the reliefs as prayed for in the application. 2. The matter was listed before this Tribunal on 03.05.2019 and the parties to the application was allowed to make the submissions and the same was heard in considerable ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Tribunal has taken a consistent view that once a petition is admitted under the provisions of IBC, 2016 and in case the Corporate Debtor is aggrieved, the recourse is to file an appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal under Section 61 of IBC, 2016. In this connection, learned counsel for the non-applicant points out to the order dated 21.02.2019 in IA No. 09/JPR/2019 in IB 746/ND/2018 (TA No. 90/2018) passed in the matter of Rajdhani Trading Co. Vs. Romesh Power Products Pvt. Ltd by this Bench of the Tribunal. 7. Learned counsel for the non-applicant/ FC also brings to the notice of this Tribunal the judgment of Hon'ble NCLAT passed in Company Appeal (AT)(lnsolvency) no. 295 of 2017 where under the Hon'ble NCLAT at paragraph No. 6 it is pointed out has held that in the absence of any power of review or recall vested with the adjudicating authority, the adjudicating authority cannot exercise such a power. Learned counsel for the non-applicant/ FC also relies on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad in this regard rendered in Khan Enterprises Vs. National Company Law Tribunal & Ors in with an equivalent citation reported in 2018(131) ALR 9....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016the Tribunal as an adjudicating authority is required to be guided by the said rules specifically framed and should not take recourse to the NCLT Rules, 2016 framed in exercise of Companies Act, 2013, as IBC, 2016 is a separate code by itself. 10. We have carefully considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the non-applicant both of whom it must be stated argued quite eloquently in canvasing support for the respective parties whom they represent. Perusal of Section 424 (2) of Companies Act, 2013 shows that this Tribunal for the purpose of discharging its functions under this Act or under IBC, 2016 shall have the same powers as are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 while trying a suit in respect of the matters specified in Clause (a) to Clause (h) of Section 424(2) of the Act of 2013. Under the Companies Act, 2013, by virtue of the powers contained under the said Act, NCLT Rules, 2016, upon its constitution of this Tribunal have been framed by the Central Government. 11. Consequent to the notification of IBC, 2016, on and from 01.12.2016, the Central Gover....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ces arising out of it. This cannot be considered as a procedural lapse on the part of the Tribunal nor on the part of the Financial Creditor which can lead to a procedural review, as sought to have been exercised by NCLT Bench Calcutta in the decision cited on behalf of the applicant company under the facts and circumstances stated therein. 14. We do not find any merits in the application in view of the reasons stated above as we do not find any procedural lapses on the part of this Tribunal exercising its powers in passing the order dated 08.03.2019. In any case recourse to the provisions of Section 61 of the IBC, 2016, in case if aggrieved has been available to the Corporate Debtor in relation to the order passed against it. 15. Before parting it is worth recollecting the words of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the matter of Mobilox Innovations Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Kirusa Software Pvt. Ltd. in civil appeal No. 9405 of 2017 at paragraph 26 and 27 in relation to the time lines provided under IBC, 2016 which are to the following effect: - 26. Another thing of importance is the timelines within which the insolvency resolution process is to be triggered. The Corporate Debtor ....