2021 (2) TMI 518

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Respondent : Mr. Aditya Chatterjee and Mr. NityaKalyani, Advocate for R-1&8 Mr. Udaya Holla, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Neha Mathen, Advocates for R- 2 to 6. Ms. Anuradha Agnihotri, Advocate ORDER Jarat Kumar Jain ,  J The Appellant Macquarie SBI Infrastructure Investment Pvt. Ltd. filed the Appeal CA(AT) No. 134 of 2020 against the order dated 16.06.2020 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, (In Brief Tribunal) Bangaluru Bench, Bangaluru. Whereby seven interim Applications Nos. 179, 180,181, 182, 183, 184 and 189 of 2020 in CP No. 78/BB/2020 filed by the Appellants have been disposed of summarily. The Appellants have filed another Appeal CA (AT) 135 of 2020 against the order dated 16.06.2020 passed by the Tribunal in CP No. 77/BB/2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he case and there is any urgency in the matter. Since the case is coming for admission for the first time and the Respondents requested time for filing their Replies to main/interim reliefs sought for, separate applications are not maintainable. Moreover, the pleadings and prayers made in the above applications are more or less covered under the reliefs sought for in the main Company Petition, therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the above IAs separately and thus, to dispose of all the IAs by granting liberty to applicants to seek appropriate interim as asked for in the main petition, on the next date of hearing, after filing Replies by the Respondents" 4. Learned Tribunal vide order dated 16.06.2020 admitted the Respondent's Petiti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Interlocutory Applications. Thus, the impugned order passed in CP No. 78/BB/2020 is erroneous and liable to be dismissed and direction be issued to the Tribunal for considering the applications and to pass the order on merit. 7. Learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 submitted that the Appellants have failed to make out any prejudice caused to them due to the impugned order. The prayers set out in the interlocutory applications are entirely covered by the reliefs sought by the Appellants under the para 44 of the main petition. The tribunal has listed the matter for consideration of interim reliefs on 10.07.2020 instead of pursuing their interim prayers before the Tribunal, the Appellants chose to challenge the impugned order. ....