TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 285
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h observations that the application filed under Section 7 of I&B Code by the Financial Creditor - Bank of India seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against 'RNA Corporation Ltd.' (Corporate Debtor), who was the Guarantor was not barred by limitation and that the dictum of law laid down in 'Dr. Vishnu Kumar Agrawal Vs. Piramal Enterprises Ltd.', Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 346/2018 was not attracted to the case of the Appellant. The instant Application has been filed by the Appellant under Rule 11 of NCLAT Rules, 2016 to review the judgment dated 7th February, 2020 on the ground that this Appellate Tribunal has made an inadvertent error in Para 14 of the Judgment ignoring various documents placed on record by both the parties which included the Deed of Guarantee executed by Chamber Constructions in favour of Respondent No. 1 on 9th December, 2013 and consequent to this error there is no debt due payable in law by the Corporate Debtor as Respondent No. 1 has claimed the same amount pertaining to the same debt in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process of the Guarantor viz. M/s Chamber Constructions Pvt. Ltd. It is submitted that the amount in qu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that the observation in the judgment that there was nothing on record to suggest that with regard to the very same debt 'M/s Chamber Constructions Pvt. Ltd.' had issued any guarantee, constitutes an error apparent on the face of the record causing grave miscarriage of justice. Reference is made to the Deed of Guarantee dated 9th December, 2013, reply affidavit of Respondent No. 1, report certifying constitution of CoC of 'M/s Chamber Constructions Pvt. Ltd.' and the list of admitted creditors of 'M/s Chamber Constructions Pvt. Ltd.' which, it is claimed, established that a Deed of Guarantee had been executed by 'M/s Chamber Constructions Pvt. Ltd.' as Guarantor for the Corporate Debtor. It is further submitted that in terms of the dictum of this Appellate Tribunal in 'Dr. Vishnu Kumar Agarwal' (supra), which continues to be a binding precedent, claim of Respondent No. 1 in respect of the debt stood extinguished in view of same being admitted in CIRP of 'M/s Chamber Constructions Pvt. Ltd. and the Adjudicating Authority, (National Company Law Tribunal) Mumbai Bench could not have admitted its claim filed under Section 7 of the I&B Code in respect of the same debt. It is further su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ting the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Appellate Tribunal" This Appellate Tribunal, while dealing with the scope of power conferred under Rule 11 in 'Action Barter Private Limited Vs. SREI Equipment Finance Limited & Anr.', I.A. Nos. 811/2020, 917/2020, 962/2020 & 1587/2020 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1434 of 2019 held as under:- "6. ............. Rule 11 is merely declaratory in the sense that this Tribunal is armed with inherent powers to pass orders or give directions necessary for advancing the cause of justice or prevent abuse of the Appellate Tribunal's process. Even in absence of Rule 11 this Appellate Tribunal, being essentially a judicial forum determining and deciding rights of parties concerned and granting appropriate relief, has no limitations in exercise of its powers to meet ends of justice or prevent abuse of its process. Such Powers being inherent in the constitution of the Appellate Tribunal, Rule 11 can merely be said to be declaring the same to avoid ambiguity and confusion. Having said that, we are of the firm view that the Rule cannot be invoked to revisit the findings returned as regards the assertion of fac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of the judgment in regard to a finding, even when the same is erroneous. It would be appropriate to refer to provisions of Section 420 of the Companies Act, 2013 dealing with orders of the Tribunal as this Appellate Tribunal is a creation of the statute. Relevant portion of Section 420 reads as under: "420 (2) The Tribunal may, at any time within two years from the date of the order, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record, amend any order passed by it, and shall make such amendment, if the mistake is brought to its notice by the parties: Provided that no such amendment shall be made in respect of any order against which an appeal has been preferred under this Act." A mere glance at Section 420 of the Companies Act, 2013 would reveal that the powers thereunder are exercisable by the 'Tribunal' defined under Section 2(90) which means the 'National Company Law tribunal, constituted under Section 408'. This power is not specifically conferred on the Appellate Tribunal. That apart, power to rectify a mistake apparent from the record cannot be construed to confer a power on the Appellate Tribunal to reappraise material on record to substitu....