TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1097
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. Arvindan, Advocate For Ms. J Parimalam, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Prajeish, Advocate For King & Partridge, for R1-R4 & R7 Ms. Indumathi Ravi, Advocate For Ms. C Keerthana, Advocate for R6 Mr. R Subramanian, Advocate for R8 JUDGMENT ( Hybrid Mode ) [Per : Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma;(Member Judicial)] 1. The Appellant has preferred the instant Company Appeal, being aggrieved as against the Impugned dated 11.08.2023, as it was passed in I.A.(IBC)/1174(CHE)/2021 in M.A./264/IB/2018 in TCP/198/IB/2017 along with I.A.(IBC)/1290(CHE)/2021 in I.A.(IBC)/1174(CHE)/2021 in M.A./264/IB/2018 in TCP/198/IB/2017. The consequential effect of the Impugned Order of 11.08.2023, as it was passed by the NCLT Chennai Bench, was that the aforesai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....without insisting upon to make the pre-deposit of the money as required under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 2022. 3. The said Writ Petition came up for consideration before the Division Bench, and the Honourable High Court of Madras, on 06.03.2025, wherein, the observation was made that in view of the statement made by the Appellant that the offer made by the GRT Hotels and Resorts Pvt. Ltd., is acceptable to Respondent No. 1 and the Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner made a statement that they will not pursue the Appeal before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. After making the aforesaid statement and considering the same, the Writ Petition was disposed of. This order was put to challenge before the Honourable Apex at the behest of GBJ ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect and in relation thereto, has been confirmed by the Honourable Apex Court in view of the observations made in Para-19 of the said judgment as extracted above. 5. The Learned Tribunal, while dealing with the Company Petition, by the judgment of the 11.08.2023, found that the conduct of the Appellant was dubious and thereby, dismiss the Interlocutory Applications on a payment of cost of Rs. 1,00,000/-. The Appellant thereafter, has filed a Memorandum of Withdrawal of the Appeal but however, it carries a rider that the "Appellant may be permitted to take a necessary legal action in the manner known to law only against Respondent Nos. 1, 4, 7 & 8". This exception sought for in a Memorandum of Withdrawal of Appeal is being vehemently opposed....