TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 843
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for R-1. (Applicant in I.A. No. 811 of 2020) Mr. Neeraj Kr. Gupta, Advocate for R-2. Mr. Srigopal Choudhary, IRP. Mr. Varun Singh and Mr. Gaurav Nair, Advocates for (Applicant in I.A. No. 1587 of 2020). Mr. Patita Paban Bishwal, Advocate Mr. Abhishek Puri, Advocate. ORDER Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1434 of 2019 titled 'Action Barter Pvt. Ltd. Vs. SREI Equipment Finance Ltd. & Anr.' preferred against order of the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) Mumbai Bench, Mumbai admitting application of 'SREI Equipment Finance Ltd.' (Financial Creditor) against 'Shree Ram Urban Infrastructure Ltd.' (Corporate Debtor) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing the inadvertent error as regards maintainability of the petition and substituting the error in regard to Company Petition as being 'not-maintainable' by reflecting the correct position that the same was 'maintainable'. It is submitted by learned counsel for Applicant that while dismissing the appeal it was erroneously recorded that the Company Petition of Respondent No. 1 was not maintainable whilst it ought to have been recorded as maintainable. 3. In I.A. No. 917 of 2020 the Appellant in the aforesaid disposed of appeal is the Applicant. He seeks clarification/ modification of the aforesaid judgment at page 5 para 5 to the extent of dismissal of appeal. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Applicant that after r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed by NCLT Mumbai vide order dated 06.11.2019. 5. In I.A. No. 1587 of 2020, the Applicant - the Official Liquidator of Bombay High Court seeks clarification whether the appeal has been allowed or dismissed, whether the IRP has been discharged or it is the Applicant as Provisional Liquidator in-charge of the affairs of the Corporate Debtor. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that once this Appellate Tribunal held that Section 7 application filed by the Financial Creditor was not maintainable, it had to allow the appeal and proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority were to be set aside and IRP discharged. Confusion is said to have arisen as regards continuation of Applicant as the Provisional Liquidator of the Corporate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ained after admission of the winding up petition. This Appellate Tribunal while noticing that similar issue had fallen for consideration before Hon'ble Apex Court in 'Forech India Ltd. Vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.' reported in 2019 SCC Online SC 87 found that the case of Appellant was covered by the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in 'Forech India Ltd.'. After referring to paras 21 to 24 of the judgment in 'Forech India Ltd.', this Appellate Tribunal held that the application under Section 7 of the I&B Code filed by the Respondent - 'SREI Equipment Finance Ltd.' was not maintainable. This observation regarding the application of 'SREI Equipment Finance Ltd.' being not-maintai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the firm view that the Rule cannot be invoked to revisit the findings retuned as regards the assertion of facts and pleas raised in the appeal and it is not open to reexamine the findings on questions of fact, how-so-ever erroneous they may be. The mistake/error must be apparent on the face of the record and must have occurred due to oversight, inadvertence or human error. Of course it would be open to correct the conclusion if the same is not compatible with the finding recorded on the issues raised. We accordingly decline to entertain any plea in regard to the merits of the matter involved at the bottom of the appeal and confine ourselves to the interpretation of the findings recorded and the conclusions derived therefrom as regards f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lant before it to apply under the Proviso to Section 434 of Companies Act, 2013 to transfer the winding up proceeding pending before the Hon'ble High Court to the NCLT which can then be treated as a proceeding under Section 9 of the I&B Code. The dictum of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court is loud and clear. An application under Section 7 of the I&B Code admitted by the Adjudicating Authority being an independent proceeding has to be decided in t erms of the provisions of I&B Code and the insolvency resolution process has to proceed unhindered and notwithstanding pendency of any other proceedings. The bar only operates against the Corporate Debtor against whom a liquidation order has been made and not to a Financial Creditor o....