TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 259
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 555 of 2020. We need to notice certain facts and events prior to filing of the Appeal and subsequent to the filing of the Appeal which are necessary to be noticed for deciding this Appeal. 2. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated by order dated 30.10.2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, in CP (IB) No. 136/Chd/Pb/2017. No Resolution Plan could be obtained. An Application under Section 33(1)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("Code" for short) was filed by the Resolution Professional praying for an order of liquidation. The Adjudicating Authority vide its order dated 13.12.2019 allowed the Application of the Resolution Professional and directed for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. The liquidation process started after the order dated 13.12.2019. In the liquidation, the Liquidator invited claims from the Financial Creditors. The Appellant i.e. 'Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.' as well as Respondent Nos.2 to 5, other Financial Creditors filed their claim. Liquidator partly admitted the claim of the Appellant. During the Liquidation Proceedings, I.A No. 368 of 2020 was filed by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion. The Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal is unable to hear the matter on the next date i.e. 12.01.2022 and decide the same within 15 days thereof, the Appellant Tribunal would be free to pass such other order/s as may be required, including that of modifying the ex parte interim order of the Tribunal or of withdrawing the matter from the file of Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal and to decide itself or to assign the same to any other Bench of the Tribunal. 4. After judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6944 of 2021 dated 26.11.2021, this Appeal was restored and was taken by this Tribunal on 13.12.2021 where the Appeal was adjourned to 28.01.2022 awaiting the order of the Tribunal which was to be passed within 15 days from 12.01.2022. When the matter was again taken up by this Tribunal on 28.01.2022, Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1 submitted that it has filed an Application to recall the order dated 26.11.2021 as per liberty given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Hence, the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court be awaited. The Adjudicating Authority having fixed the matter on 24.02.2022, this Tribunal observed that the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o await the final adjudication of the claims pending before the Hon'ble Debt Recovery Tribunal or the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, or any other authority/Court/Tribunal as the case may be, before any claim for payment of financial dues on behalf of Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 can be accepted and monies accordingly disbursed. 2. Direct the Respondent No.1, to effectively contest the claims made by the corporate debtor before various Courts/Tribunals, in order to discharge his legal obligations under the IB Code 2016. 3. Pass such other orders as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case. INTERIM RELIEF 1. Pending consideration of the reliefs as aforesaid, restrain the Respondent No.1 from disbursing any funds to Respondent Nos. 2 to 5; 2. Direct the Respondent No.1, to effectively contest the claims made by the Corporate Debtor before various Hon'ble Courts/Tribunals, in order to discharge his legal obligations under the IB Code 2016; 3. Pass such other orders as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the present case." 10. Application I.A No. 368 of 2020 was tak....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cknowledgment of receipt of notices within one week from today failing which they are liable to pay cost of Rs. 25,000/- in favour of "The Prime Minister's National Relief Fund". 12. Reply be filed within one week after receipt of notice with a copy in advance to the counsel opposite. 13. The interim order granted on 09.09.2020 is extended till the next date of hearing of the IA and if the applicant failed to serve the notice on the respondents within one week from today, as observed above, the interim order shall stands vacated. 14. List on 10.11.2020. IA No. 555/2020 17. This IA has been filed by Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited seeking to set-aside the ex-parte order dated 09.09.2020 passed in IA No. 368/2020. Heard Mr. Manish Jain, the learned counsel for the applicant. 18. Issue notice of this application to the respondents for 10.11.2020 and the applicant shall collect the notices from the Registry and send the same by speed post immediately to the respondents at their registered addresses attaching therewith copy of the application and the entire paper book and the copy of this order. 19. The applicant shall file affidavit of service supported by acknowledgment of r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1 which could not be complied as three months are already over, we do express anguish with regard to the delay. We do realise the difficulties of the litigants as well as difficulties being faced by the Tribunal. In the circumstances, we dispose of the present Appeal with only a request to the Adjudicating Authority to take out time and decide the present IAs at the earliest." 15. Against the order dated 10.08.2021, the Appeal was filed by the Appellant before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court noticing the proceedings taken on I.A No. 368 of 2020 and I.A No. 555 of 2020 and the orders of this Tribunal passed on 19.01.2021 and 10.08.2021, by order dated 26.11.2021 disposed of the Appeal and made following observations:- "The only aspect relevant in the present case is that the IAs pending before the Adjudicating Authority need to be decided without further loss of time. For that matter, the Adjudicating Authority is definitely expected to keep in view the requirement of expeditious proceeding under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 as also the directions issued by the Appellate Tribunal, even if expressed in soft terms. We are informed that the said or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le for it to move appropriate application for consideration. It goes without saying that we have not made any comments on merits of the case either way. The present appeal stands disposed of accordingly." 16. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above order clearly observed that if the Chandigarh Bench of the Tribunal is unable to finally hear the matter on 12.01.2022 and to decide the same within 15 days thereof, the Appellate Tribunal would be free to pass such other order/s as may be required. After the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 26.11.2021, when the matter was again taken by this Tribunal, the Respondent No.1 has informed about filing of the Application for recall of the order dated 26.11.2021 which Application stood dismissed on 14.02.2022. It will be relevant to notice the following observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court:- "It is rather disturbing to note that despite specific orders of the Appellate Tribunal as also of this Court, the Adjudicating Authority has not been able to decide the pending applications and now, the submissions before us on behalf of the respondent No.1 (applicant) are to the effect that there ought not to be "tearing hurry"....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o.1- Suspended Director has no locus to challenge the admission of the claim of the Appellant by the Liquidator. Under Section 42 of the Code, it is only the Creditor who have given right to challenge the order of the Liquidator. There was no locus of the Respondent No.1 to file Application I.A No. 368 of 2020. 19. Shri Ankur Mittal, Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 refuting the submissions of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that Respondent No.1 has every right to challenge the decision of the Liquidator erroneously accepting the claim of the Appellant. It is submitted that there are no dues which are owed by the Corporate Debtor to the Appellant. Liquidator has wrongly accepted the partial claim of the Appellant with regard to which Respondent No.1 being aggrieved filed the Application. It is submitted that in the Insolvency Resolution Process itself, the Respondent No.1 has filed an Application challenging the admission of the claim by Resolution Professional which Application could not be decided on merits. It is further submitted that the counter claim filed by the Corporate Debtor before the DRT is necessary to be decided which will prove that n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pplication which included the Appellant. Respondent No.1 wanted interim order against the Financial Creditors but the Application was not served. The contention of the Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1 is not that the Application I.A No. 368 of 2020 was filed after service of the copy rather it has submitted he does not have any instructions as on date. The fact that copy of the Application I.A No. 368 of 2020 was not served is fully proved by subsequent order dated 21.10.2020 where the Adjudicating Authority has noted that Learned Counsel for the Applicant (Counsel for Respondent No.1) has not served the notice to the Respondents. We have already extracted the order dated 21.10.2020 in foregoing discussion. 24. We, thus, are fully satisfied that Application I.A No. 368 of 2020 was filed without serving copy on Appellant who was to be affected by the interim order. Furthermore, it is relevant to notice Application I.A No. 368 of 2020 was filed on 28.07.2020 and it came for consideration on 09.09.2020 hence more than one month's time was available to Respondent No.1 to serve copy on the Appellant. The order dated 09.09.2020 was ex parte which is clear from the order itself. I....