2021 (5) TMI 177

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... himself as one of the financial creditors of the Corporate Debtor, viz., M/s. Digjam Limited, claiming to have paid an amount of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- (Rupees Two Crores only) as advance sale consideration to M/s. Digjam Limited, for a sale and purchase transaction for purchase of land owned by the Corporate Debtor to be concluded in three months. 2. The facts of the case are that the Respondent No. 7, i.e. M/s. Digjam Limited) underwent Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), vide order dated 26.04.2019, passed by this Adjudicating Authority in CP (IB) No. 594/2018, i.e. petition filed under Section 9 of the IB Code by M/s. Oman Inc. (HUF) for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against M/s. Digjam Limited. 3. It ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd circumstances of the case and thus render justice. 5. It is pertinent to note herein that, had there been any irregularity in the admission order passed by this Adjudicating Authority in the IB Petition filed under Section 9 of the IB Code, in that event, the respondent/the then corporate debtor of CP (IB) 594 of 2018 would have approached before the Hon'ble Appellate Authority. However, the corporate debtor never approached the Appellate Authority for setting aside the admission order so passed by this Adjudicating Authority on 26.04.2019. Hence, admission order reached to its finality. It is to be mentioned herein that on receipt of the Resolution Plan, the CoC accepted the same and the Resolution Plan in respect of the Corporat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ts own order either under section 60(5) of the IB Code or Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules 2016. Further, Hon'ble NCLAT in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 848 of 2019- Deepak Kumar vs. M/s. Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd., while dealing with the matter Hon'ble NCLAT observed that: "...power to 'Review' is not an 'inherent power' and must be showered by Law either expressly or by necessary implication. As a matter of fact, the power to 'Review' is a creation of statute. Indeed, a 'Review Jurisdiction' cannot be pressed into service as an 'Appellate Jurisdiction'. Moreover, the 'Power of Review' is not to be confused with an Appellate power." 9. It is further observed that; "23.....