2023 (7) TMI 1370 - SCH - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Maintainability of SLP - Availability of statutory remedy - HELD THAT - The factual debate must take place before the NCLAT on the application of the law and then would it be only appropriate for this Court to apply its mind against the order of the NCLAT which is also a statutory remedy. The correct approach would not be to directly entertain the special leave petitions against the orders of the NCLT - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Correction of Order in Civil Appeal, Tagging of Special Leave Petitions with Different Project, Correct Approach for Entertaining Special Leave Petitions

The Supreme Court, in Civil Appeal No.4095/2023, noted an error in recording the order in a previous appeal and corrected the same, acknowledging that the order was mistakenly recorded in a different appeal where time was sought by the counsel for the resolution applicant (R-2) to obtain instructions.

Regarding Civil Appeal No.4096/2023 & Civil Appeal No.4095/2023, the Court observed that the basis for tagging the special leave petitions with a different project did not apply to these cases. It emphasized that the factual debate should occur before the NCLAT on the application of the law, and only then would it be appropriate for the Court to consider the NCLAT's order as a statutory remedy. The Court stated that directly entertaining the special leave petitions against the NCLT's orders would not be the correct approach. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed with the appellants being granted the liberty to appeal before the NCLAT within the stipulated time. The Court also excluded the period from the filing of the special leave petitions until the present date for the purposes of filing the appeals.