TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (2) TMI 519
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Committee of Creditors (CoC) of the Company, passed on 22nd October, 2019, the petitioner was appointed as Resolution Professional (RP) in respect of the Company. 3. Admittedly, arbitral proceedings, between the petitioner and the respondent, were continuing before a three-member Arbitral Tribunal, and have yet to conclude. The mandate of the learned Arbitral Tribunal has, in the interregnum, expired. The petitioner has, in these circumstances, invoked Section 29A(5) of the 1996 Act, by means of the present petition, seeking extension of the mandate of the learned Arbitral Tribunal to conclude the arbitral proceedings and render award. 4. A reply to the present petition has been filed by the respondent, which is represented by Mr. Nalin Tripathi, learned counsel. Mr. Tripathi, essentially, questions the competence of the petitioner, as RP, to file the present petition on behalf of the company. Reliance has been placed, for this submission, on Section 12 of the IBC, which reads thus: "12. Time-limit for completion of insolvency resolution process - (1) Subject to sub-section (2), the corporate insolvency resolution process shall be completed within a perio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e suo moto cognizance of the unprecedented situation arising out of spread of COVID19 virus declared a pandemic. Having regard to the hardships being faced by various stakeholders as also the legal fraternity, which go beyond filing of Appeals/cases, which has already been taken care of by the Hon'ble Apex Court by extending the period of limitation with effect from 15th March, 2020 till further order/s in terms of order dated 23rd March, 2020 in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No(s).03/2020, inasmuch as certain steps required to be taken by various Authorities under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 or to comply with various provisions and to adhere to the prescribed timelines for taking the 'Resolution Process' to its logical conclusion in order to obviate and mitigate such hardships, this Appellate Tribunal in exercise of powers conferred by Rule 11 of National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Rules, 2016 r/w the decision of this Appellate Tribunal rendered in "Quinn Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Mack Soft Tech Pvt. Ltd. in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.185 of 2018" decided on 8th May, 2018 do hereby order as follows: - (1) That the period of lockdown ordered by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....020, 7th July 2020, 29th July 2020, 4th August 2020, 19th August 2020, 31st August 2020, 30th September 2020, 14th October 2020, 23rd October 2020, 29th October 2020, 3rd November 2020, 14th November 2020, 23rd November 2020, 27th November, 2020, 21st December 2020, 24th December, 2020. 4) Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Order No. 403/2020-PM-1 (A) Dated 1st May 2020, 11th May 2020, 17th May 2020, 20th May 2020, 30th May 2020, 29th June 2020, 29th July 2020, 29th August 2020, 30th September 2020, 27th October 2020 and 25th November 2020 and 28th December, 2020. Whereas, in exercise of the powers, conferred under the Disaster Management Act 2005, the undersigned, in his capacity as Chairperson, State Executive Committee has issued an Order dated 30th September, 2020 and 14th October, 2020 (extended by order dated 29th October, 2020 and 27th November, 2020) for containment of COVD-19 in the State, for a period upto 31st December, 2020 and issued revised guidelines by including certain activities from time to time vide above mentioned orders. Whereas the State Government is satisfied that the State of Maharashtra is threatened with the spread of COVID-19 viru....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 19^th May 2020, 21st May 2020, 31st May 2020, 4th June 2020, 25th June 2020, 29th June 2020, 6th July 2020, 7th July 2020, 29th July 2020, 4th August 2020 and 19th August 2020. 4) Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Order No. 403/2020-PM-1 (A) Dated 1st May 2020, 11th May 2020, 17th May 2020, 20th May 2020, 30th May 2020, 29th June 2020, 29th July 2020 and 29th August 2020. Whereas, in exercise of the powers, conferred under the Disaster Management Act 2005, the undersigned, in his capacity as Chairperson, State Executive Committee has issued an Order dated 29th July, 2020 to extend the lockdown measures up to 31st August, 2020 and issued revised consolidated guidelines from time to time vide above mentioned orders to contain the spread of COVID-19. Whereas the State Government is satisfied that the State of Maharashtra is threatened with the spread of COVID-19 virus, and therefore to take certain emergency measures to prevent and contain the spread of virus, the Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 2 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897, read with all other enabling provisions of The Disaster Management Act, 2005, it is expedient to ext....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....automatically extended. He, therefore, reiterates his submission that the petition is itself not maintainable at the instance of Mr. Anish Niranjan Nanavaty, who claims to be the RP of the Company. 11. In my view, it is not necessary for this Court, while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 29A(5) of the 1996 Act, to enter into this controversy in detail, to the extent to which Mr. Tripathi would exhort examination. A reading of the order dated 30th March, 2020 (supra) passed by the NCLAT in Suo Motu Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1 of 2020, read with the order dated 29th December, 2020, passed by the Government of Maharashtra, indicates that, to one extent or the other, a lockdown is, prima facie, continuing in the said State. As to whether, seen in the backdrop of the order dated 31st August, 2020 (supra) of the State of Maharashtra, on which Mr. Tripathi places reliance, Mr. Anish Niranjan Nanavaty would be entitled to continue as Resolution Professional on the strength of para 1 of the order dated 30th March, 2020 (supra) of the NCLAT, is an involved issue which, in my view, is not required to be examined by this Court in exercising jurisdiction under Section 29A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Infrastructure Limited but there is no moratorium in the arbitral proceedings in which the Corporate Debtor is the Claimant and as there is no counterclaim filed by the Respondent (BSNL) against the Claimant the arbitration proceedings can continue. In this email, it is also stated that as the registered office of the Claimant and the Resolution Professional are situated in Mumbai where the lockdown situation still continues, the time period as stipulated in Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for making the award stands extended by virtue by the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court from time to time. In this email, it is however stated that by abundant caution the Claimant and the Resolution professional shall also approach the Hon'ble Delhi High Court under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking extension of time in making the award and that in the meanwhile the arbitral Tribunal could fix a case management hearing through video conferencing. The second proviso under Section 29A(4) inserted by the arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act 2019 states that where any application under the ....