TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 1809
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and cancel the ex-parte order of admission of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against them on the basis of the application filed by Operational Creditor, M/S Sanjay Stores under Section 9 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 2. It is not in dispute that this Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 29.10.2018 admitted the Operational Creditor's application to start Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of the Corporate Debtor ex-parte. One Mr. Rajesh Chhaparia appointed as Interim Resoluntion Professional. 3. The Corporate Debtor filed this application stating that notice of this application has not been duly served on them (para 13 of application). However, in next paragraph at para 14, they further stated that the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d Ld. Counsel for Corporate Debtor as well as Ld. Counsel appearing for the Operational Creditor. I have perused the record. Rule 49 of National Company Law Tribunal Rule states that, (1) Where on the date fixed for hearing the petition or application or on any other date to which such hearing may be adjourned, the applicant appear when the petition or the application is called for hearing, this Tribunal may adjourn the hearing or hear and decide the petition or the application ex-parte. (2) Where a petition or an application has been heard exparte against a respondent or respondents, such respondent or respondents may apply to the Tribunal for an order to set it aside and if such respondent or respondents satisfies ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....against them to be set aside is that the Advocate appointed by them did not appear in the matter. Advocate failed in her duty and for her failure, they may not be made to suffer. 9. It is to be noted that order to admit the Corporate Debtor in Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process is harsh order. Even this Adjudicating Authority while passing order against them had observed that the Corporate Debtor had raised serious dispute about the claim of Operational Creditor but they did not appear for the matter to contest the claim. Ld. Counsel for the Corporate Debtor submitted that in view of above, the Corporate Debtor may be given opportunity to contest the claim by setting aside ex-parte order passed against them. As against this, Ld. Adv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting Authority passed order ex-parte. In fact it was duty of the Advocate of Corporate Debtor to inform this Adjudicating Authority that she has not been instructed by the Corporate Debtor to appear on their behalf. In such a situation, this Adjudicating Authority would have issued notice afresh to the Corporate Debtor. In my considered opinion for fault of Advocate, of the Corporate Debtor should not suffer and hence, I am inclined to set aside exparte passed against the Corporate Debtor on some terms. 13. It is to be noted that on date 19.11.2018, one advocate (not who is to appear early) requested this Adjudicating Authority not to proceed further with CIRP because Corporate Debtor was intending to challenge the order passed by this A....