2018 (10) TMI 1951 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Territorial Jurisdiction - Appellant being located at Delhi, National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi - registered office of Corporate Debtor is situated at Haryana - HELD THAT - It is clear that the Adjudicating Authority in relation to insolvency resolution and liquidation for corporate persons including corporate debtors and personal guarantors thereof shall be the National Company Law Tribunal having territorial jurisdiction that means that it will be the Corporate Debtor against whom the resolution process or liquidation is initiated, the National Company Law Tribunal has the jurisdiction, Adjudicating Authority having jurisdiction to entertain such application. It is not in dispute that with regard to Corporate Debtor whose registered office is situated in Haryana, the National Company Law Tribunal Chandigarh has been made the Adjudicating Authority. In the present case, the Corporate Debtor/ Corporate Person s registered office is situated in Gurgaon, Haryana, therefore, the Hon ble President, NCLT for New Delhi Bench (Adjudicating Authority) rightly observed that petition at New Delhi is not maintainable - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Jurisdiction of Adjudicating Authority under I&B Code

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the Operational Creditor against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority, stating that the territorial jurisdiction lies with NCLT-Adjudicating Authority Chandigarh. The Appellant argued that since they are located in Delhi, NCLT New Delhi should have jurisdiction based on Section 60 of the I&B Code. However, the Tribunal pointed out that as per Section 60(1) of the I&B Code, the Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons should be the NCLT having territorial jurisdiction over the place where the registered office of the corporate person is located. In this case, since the Corporate Debtor's registered office is in Gurgaon, Haryana, the NCLT Chandigarh is the appropriate Adjudicating Authority. Thus, the appeal was dismissed as the NCLT New Delhi did not have jurisdiction to entertain the application.

The judgment emphasized the importance of the specific provisions of the law regarding the territorial jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority under the I&B Code. It clarified that the Adjudicating Authority for insolvency resolution and liquidation for corporate persons, including corporate debtors, should be the NCLT having territorial jurisdiction over the place where the registered office of the corporate person is situated. This interpretation ensures that the resolution process or liquidation is initiated by the appropriate Adjudicating Authority based on the location of the Corporate Debtor's registered office. The Tribunal's decision was based on a strict application of the statutory provisions to determine the correct jurisdiction for initiating insolvency proceedings, highlighting the importance of adherence to legal requirements in such matters.

In conclusion, the judgment upheld the principle that the Adjudicating Authority for corporate insolvency matters should be based on the location of the Corporate Debtor's registered office, as specified in the relevant provisions of the I&B Code. The decision to dismiss the appeal was based on the clear statutory mandate that the NCLT with territorial jurisdiction over the registered office of the Corporate Debtor is the appropriate forum for initiating insolvency proceedings. This case serves as a reminder of the significance of complying with legal requirements and statutory provisions when determining jurisdiction in insolvency and liquidation matters under the I&B Code.