2021 (2) TMI 1195 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Amendment in cause title - power of Tribunal to review its own order - HELD THAT - Failure of non-compliance on the part of the Petitioner disentitles it to continue with this Petition. It is also projected by the Ld. Advocate for the Corporate Debtor that this Tribunal does not have the power to review of its own order. In so far as this Petition is concerned the Petitioner as reflected in the cause title contains both the name of the Sole Proprietor as well as the name of the Sole Proprietary concern and hence the Petition can be taken on record. The Corporate Debtor is directed to file its reply to this Petition within a period of three (3) weeks from today - Post this matter on 08.03.2021 for completion of the pleadings and enquiry.

Summary

Issues:
1. Compliance with IBC provisions regarding amending cause title
2. Power of Tribunal to review its own order
3. Validity of Petition based on the cause title

Compliance with IBC provisions regarding amending cause title:
The judgment refers to the compliance of the Petitioner with the requirements of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) based on the judgment by the Hon'ble NCLAT in a specific case. The Advocate for the Petitioner argues that the Petitioner has already fulfilled the necessary obligations under the IBC, thus not needing to amend the cause title as directed by the Tribunal in previous orders. The Tribunal considers the submissions and directs the Corporate Debtor to file a reply to the Petition within three weeks.

Power of Tribunal to review its own order:
The Advocate for the Corporate Debtor objects to the Petitioner's submission, claiming that the Tribunal had granted time to the Petitioner to rectify the cause title by reflecting the name of the Sole Proprietor accurately. The Corporate Debtor argues that noncompliance by the Petitioner should disentitle them to continue with the Petition and asserts that the Tribunal lacks the authority to review its own order. However, the judgment cites the NCLAT decision, emphasizing that the defects in the application can be cured by the Adjudicating Authority, and the objection does not hold ground.

Validity of Petition based on the cause title:
The judgment analyzes the cause title of the Petition, noting that it contains both the name of the Sole Proprietor and the Sole Proprietary concern. Based on this observation, the Tribunal concludes that the Petition can be accepted and taken on record. The judgment sets a deadline for the Corporate Debtor to respond to the Petition and schedules the next hearing for the completion of pleadings and further inquiry on the matter.