AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1525
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Co. Act.-38(PB)/2023 Old CP No. 451/2013, TP (Co. act.)-39(PB)/203 Old CP No. 429/2013, TP (Co. Act.)-40 (PB)/2023 Old CP No. 450/2013 moved under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (Code) whereby all the petitions filed by the appellants have been rejected by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority by passing a common judgment. 2. All aforesaid appeals have been filed against the same impugned order and for the sake of convenience are being disposed of by passing this common judgment. 3. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals are that appellant has entered into an agreement with three companies namely B.A.G. Infotainment Pvt. Ltd. now known as M/s Skyline Radio Network Ltd., B.A.G. Newsline Network Ltd. now known as M/s News 24 Broadcast India Ltd. and B.A.G. Glamour Pvt. Ltd. now known as M/s E24 Glamour Ltd. on 22.04.2010 whereby he was appointed to act as the Exclusive Representative for selling available advertising options for the TV Channel namely News 24 and was to receive commission as consideration. He was also responsible for negotiating on behalf of the CD and was entitled to a commission of 12%, 15% and 25% on reaching a particular thre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ashokkumar Aswani vs. Falcon Industries and Anr. He further submits that since it is a legal issue the same must be decided as first and the judgment of Ld. Adjudicating Authority may also be upheld by this Appellate Tribunal apart from the grounds on which it has been passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority. 7. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant on the other hand submits that no doubt a Co-ordinate Bench of this Appellate Tribunal in the aforesaid case i.e. Mr. Navin Ashokkumar Aswani (supra) (hereinafter called as Falcons case) has held that after transfer of the petition to the Ld. Adjudicating Authority the same must fulfil the threshold as per the amended Section 4 of the Code applicable on that day, but in the said judgment this Appellate Tribunal has not considered the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jaipur Metals and Electricals (Employees Organisation) vs. Jaipur Metals and Electricals, (2019) 4 SCC 227, BCCI vs. Kochi Cricket Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 6 SCC 287, CIT vs. Dhadi Sahoo, 1994 Supp (1) SCC 257 and A. Navinchandra Steels (Pvt) Ltd. vs. Srei Equipment Finance Ltd., (2021) 4 SCC 435 and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, (Second Amendment) Act, 2018, Act No.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court of India by filing Civil Appeal No. 4151 of 2026 and the Appeal has been dismissed on 27.04.2026 and only the question of law has been kept open, however, no interference has been made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the order passed by this Appellate Tribunal. 13. We have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties. 14. It appears to be an admitted fact that in the year 2013 on account of alleged non-payment of Commission to the tune of Rs. 43,71,768/- Rs. 8,69,345/- and Rs. 23,08,627/- a petition under Section 433, 434 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956 was filed by the appellant before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. However, in the meantime the Code was enacted and notifications were issued for transfer of certain winding up matters pending before any court to the NCLT which may be treated as application under the Code. 15. It is further reflected that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has transferred the proceedings pending before it pertaining to the winding up of the CD to the NCLT vide order dated 19.10.2023 by passing the following order: "Mr. Yashas RK, Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner appears through VC. Mr. Kartikay Dutta, Ld. Cousnel for the Responden....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days; and (c) all proceedings under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), including proceedings relating to arbitration, compromise, arrangements and reconstruction and winding up of companies, pending immediately before such date before any District Court or High Court, shall stand transferred to the Tribunal and the Tribunal may proceed to deal with such proceedings from the stage before their transfer: Provided that only such proceedings relating to the winding up of companies shall be transferred to the Tribunal that are at a stage as may be prescribed by the Central Government. Provided further that any party or parties to any proceedings relating to the winding up of companies pending before any court immediately before the commencement of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2018 (Ord. 6 of 2018), may file an application for transfer of such proceedings and the Court may by order transfer such proceedings to the Tribunal and the proceedings so transferred shall be dealt with by the Tribunal as an application for initiation of corporate insolvency resolu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ded with Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 is crystal clear that by transfer of such proceedings the same shall be dealt with by the Tribunal as an application of initiation of CIR process under the Code and when the Tribunal would treat such proceeding as an application for initiation of CIRP, the threshold which is applicable on the date of considering of such application would be relevant. 22. Ld. Sr. Counsel appearing for the appellant has emphasised on the Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, However Section 6 of the General Clauses Act Precisely Section 6 (2) provides that notwithstanding any repeal, anything done or action taken under the repealed ordinance shall be deemed to have been done under the Amending Act. 23. Section 6 of the General Clauses Act is generally applicable to the repealing of the Acts or Regulations but if a different intention appears in the repealing Act then this Section would not come to the rescue of the Appellant. As we have already discussed that the proviso appended to Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 only talks about that the proceedings of winding up pending before any court to be transformed as an application before the NCLT....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 9 application in which it was converted after transfer has to automatically admitted. 21. Proceedings under Section 433 and 434 of the Companies Act are Winding Up proceedings and as per the statutory scheme of the Companies Act r/w Companies Court Rules, 1959, the transfer of said Winding Up petition has been made to the NCLT and has to be heard and decided as per the I&B Code. 22. When the Winding Up petition has been transferred to the NCLT, it has to be considered as per the scheme of the I&B Code to fulfil the requirement for admission under Section 9 application which has to be fulfilled and admission of Winding Up petition under Section 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 shall not obviate consideration of Section 9 application for its admission. In the above context, we may also refer to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in "(2021) 4 SCC 435, A. Navinchandra Steels (P) Ltd. vs. Srei Equipment Finance Ltd.", where Hon'ble Supreme Court had occasion to consider the provision of Section 7, 9 and 238 of the I&B Code in reference to Winding Up Petition under the Companies Act, 2013. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above case in Para 25 and 29 laid dow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erent classes, or by both of those methods." What is clear by this Section is that a compromise or arrangement can also be entered into in an IBC proceeding if liquidation is ordered. However, what is of importance is that under the Companies Act, it is only winding up that can be ordered, whereas under the IBC, the primary emphasis is on revival of the corporate debtor through infusion of a new management. 29. Dr Singhvi and Shri Ranjit Kumar have vehemently argued that SREI has suppressed the winding-up proceeding in its application under Section 7 IBC before NCLT and has resorted to Section 7 only as a subterfuge to avoid moving a transfer application before the High Court in the pending winding-up proceeding. These arguments do not avail the appellant for the simple reason that Section 7 is an independent proceeding, as has been held in a catena of judgments of this Court, which has to be tried on its own merits. Any "suppression" of the winding-up proceeding would, therefore, not be of any effect in deciding a Section 7 petition on the basis of the provisions contained in the IBC. Equally, it cannot be said that any subterfuge has been availed of for the same....