9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 1036 - HC - Insolvency and BankruptcyPrinciples of natural justice - respondent has filed reply and served it on the petitioner s counsel but the copy of the same has not been filed before the NCLT - opportunity to reply to section 7 petition also not allowed - HELD THAT - As noted in the Order dated 6th January, 2023 passed by the NCLT clearly the reply had been filed by the Petitioner and it continued to remain under scrutiny in terms of the Data Management System (DMS), which is maintained by the NCLT itself. Thus, it is not clear as to why the reply was not on record. Be that as it may, a perusal of the order sheets as extracted above does not give any impression to the Court that the Petitioner in any manner was delaying deliberately or otherwise. On the first date when the time for reply was granted to the Petitioner, the Petitioner had filed the reply before the next date of hearing i.e. on 30th November, 2022. Consequences of any order passed under section 7 of the IBC can be quite far reaching for any company. Accordingly, in the opinion of this Court, the Petitioner deserves an opportunity to defend its position - The Petitioner s reply, which has been filed on 29th November, 2022, shall be placed on record before the NCLT which shall take up the matter for hearing on 15th March, 2023 - The Petitioner shall be given opportunity to make its submissions in respect of the petition under Section 7 of the IBC. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to impugned order of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) dated 6th January, 2023. Analysis: The Petitioner filed a petition challenging the NCLT's order dated 6th January, 2023, which closed the right to file a reply due to objections. The Petitioner argued that the delay in filing the reply was not deliberate and requested an opportunity to plead its case. The Bank contended that the order was appealable before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT). The Court noted that the Petitioner, a corporate debtor, was served with a Section 7 petition under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) by Punjab National Bank (PNB). The Court cited relevant judgments emphasizing the importance of providing the corporate debtor with an opportunity to file a reply before admitting the application. Accordingly, the Court directed notice to be issued to the corporate debtor, returnable within seven days. On subsequent dates, the Petitioner was given time to file replies and rejoinders. The Court noted the Petitioner's efforts to comply with the orders within the specified timelines. However, on 6th January, 2023, the NCLT observed that the reply filed by the Petitioner was still under scrutiny and not on record. The NCLT closed the right to file a reply due to the Petitioner's failure to rectify defects. The Court, after considering the consequences of an order under Section 7 of the IBC, directed the Petitioner's reply to be placed on record and granted an opportunity to defend its position. The matter was scheduled for a hearing on 15th March, 2023, and the Registrar General was directed to communicate the order to the NCLT to safeguard the Petitioner's interests. In conclusion, the petition challenging the NCLT's order was disposed of with the above directions, emphasizing the importance of providing the Petitioner with a fair opportunity to defend its position in the proceedings under the IBC.
|
