TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 14
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the Financial Creditor- Ms. Pallavi Joshi Bakhru against the Corporate Debtor on 18.04.2018. The Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 03.07.2018 admitted the Application under Section 7 and appointed Interim Resolution Professional. An Application CA No. 400/2018 was filed by the Resolution Professional before the Adjudicating Authority seeking direction to Suspended Board of Directors of the Corporate Debtor to supply documents as specified therein. The Appellant- Suspended Board of Directors of the Corporate Debtor did not co-operate with the Resolution Professional, hence, Application under Section 19(2) of the Code was filed by the Resolution Professional. By order dated 16.07.2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority, Suspended Directors were directed to surrender before the Tribunal on 20.07.2021 and Non-Bailable Warrants were also issued. On 03.08.2021, Suspended Directors moved an Application for cancellation of the Non-Bailable Warrants which Application was dismissed by the Adjudicating Authority on 03.08.2021. By the same order, Suspended Board of Directors were again directed to surrender before the Registrar, NCLT on or before 06.08.2021 and they were also direc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....und by procedures laid down under the Civil Procedure Code. It is further submitted that in event non-compliance with Section 19 of the Code, the defaulting party may be liable for punishment in terms of Section 70 of the Code but due to non-compliance, non-bailable warrant cannot be issued. It is submitted that the Tribunal is competent to enforce its order. However, there is no provision which requires that a person against whom enforcement is sought must be physically present or that his presence must be secured by issuance of Non-Bailable Warrant. Learned Counsel further submits that conditions upon which Non-Bailable Warrant can be issued are not satisfied. 6. Mr. Swapnil Gupta, Learned Counsel appearing for the Resolution Professional has refuted the submissions of the Counsel for the Appellants and submits that there is ample jurisdiction with Adjudicating Authority to enforce the attendance of any person in the proceeding. It is submitted that the Suspended Directors did not co-operate with the Resolution Professional nor supplied the documents asked for, only few documents have been supplied and Resolution Professional has to file Application under Section 19(2) of the Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as intentionally avoided service, it may issue a proclamation requiring him to attend to give evidence or to produce the document at a time and place to be named therein; and a copy of such proclamation shall be affixed on the outer door or other conspicuous part of the house in which he ordinarily resides. (3) In lieu of or at the time of issuing such proclamation, or at any time afterwards, the Court may, in its discretion, issue a warrant, either with or without bail, for the arrest of such person, and may make an order for the attachment of his property to such amount as it thinks fit, not exceeding the amount of the costs of attachment and of any fine which may be imposed under rule 12: Provided that no Court of Small Causes shall make an order for the attachment of immovable property." 11. Order XVI Rule 10 specifically empowers the Court to issue in its discretion at any time warrant either with or without bail for arrest of such person who without any lawful excuse, failed to attend or to produce the document in compliance with such summons. 12. The present is a case where the order was issued to Suspended Directors to produce the documents. When the Suspended Directo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailable Warrants was rejected. The provision of Rule 77 of the NCLAT Rules, 2016 read with Order XVI Rule 10 of Civil Procedure Code fully empowers the Adjudicating Authority to issue a Non-Bailable Warrant for enforcing attendance of a person. The power exercised by the Adjudicating Authority in issuing a Non-Bailable Warrant to the Appellants is thus well within jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority and the submission of the Counsel for the Appellants that Adjudicating Authority is not clothe with any power to issue Non-Bailable Warrant has to be rejected. The Appellants who are the Suspended Directors of the Corporate Debtor are required to submit the relevant documents and co-operate in the proceeding and are avoiding to comply with the direction and in the order dated 03.08.2021, the Adjudicating Authority had again directed the Suspended Directors to surrender and fresh Non-Bailable Warrants were issued but they have not surrendered rather press their Application for cancellation of warrant which was rightly rejected. The submission of the Counsel for the Appellants that the Adjudicating Authority could have proceeded ex-parte and passed order against the Corporate Debto....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bunal is bound to follow the principles of natural justice, there can be no two opinions about the said principle. Section 424(1) of the Companies Act, 2013 specifically provides that the Tribunal while disposing of any proceeding before it shall be guided by the principles of natural justice. Present is a case where principles of natural justice have not been violated. The Appellants were issued notice on 02.08.2018 in response to which they failed to appear. Thereafter, Bailable Warrants were issued on 29.08.2018 and 17.10.2018 but the presence of the Appellants could not be secured and it was thereafter on 19.10.2018, Non-Bailable Warrants were issued. Issuance of Non-Bailable Warrants were repeated thereafter as noticed above. When the Appellants in spite of notices and Bailable Warrants chose not to appear before the Tribunal, the Tribunal was left with no option except to issue Non-Bailable Warrants. 18. The Submission of the Learned Counsel for the Appellants is that Tribunal is not bound by procedures laid down under the CPC, we have already noticed that Rule 77 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 applies various provisions of Civil Procedures Code. We in the present case are only con....