2020 (4) TMI 5 - AT - Central Excise

Prohibition on institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the Corporate Debtor - HELD THAT - Ld. NCLT has specifically prohibited for institution of fresh suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings in the judicial forum including the Tribunal. In view of the fact that the petition filed by the petitioner, the appellants herein, was admitted by the Ld. NCLT, we are of the considered opinion that the present appeals filed by the appellants cannot be proceeded further till final decision on the issue is rendered by Ld. NCLT - matter adjourned sine die.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Prohibition on institution of suits or continuation of pending suits during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.
2. Admissibility of appeal when a petition is filed before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT).

Issue 1: Prohibition on institution of suits or continuation of pending suits during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process

The judgment highlighted the observations made by the Ld. National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) regarding the prohibition on various actions against the Corporate Debtor during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The NCLT specifically prohibited the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the Corporate Debtor, including actions related to the transfer or disposal of assets, recovery of property, and termination of essential goods or services. The order of moratorium was to be in effect until the completion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process or until specific conditions were met, as outlined in the judgment. The Public announcement of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process was also mandated, and an Interim Resolution Professional was appointed to oversee the process as per the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code.

Issue 2: Admissibility of appeal when a petition is filed before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)

The judgment addressed the situation where the appellants had filed a petition before the Ld. NCLT, which was admitted. The appellants sought an adjournment of the matter before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Hyderabad based on the ongoing proceedings at the NCLT. The Appellate Tribunal, upon reviewing the order of the NCLT and considering the fact that the petition was admitted, decided that the appeals filed by the appellants could not proceed further until a final decision was rendered by the NCLT. Consequently, the matter was adjourned sine die, allowing the appellants to update the Appellate Tribunal on the progress of the petition before the NCLT for further action based on the NCLT's decision.

This judgment emphasizes the importance of adhering to the restrictions imposed during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and demonstrates the interplay between different judicial forums when related matters are pending. The decision to adjourn the proceedings at the Appellate Tribunal based on the ongoing petition before the NCLT showcases the coordination required between different legal bodies in matters concerning corporate insolvency and resolution processes.