9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (9) TMI 82 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyCIRP - Liquidation Proceedings against the Corporate Debtor - pendency of Arbitral Proceedings - it is the stand of the Appellant pendency of Liquidation Proceedings against the Corporate Debtor cannot legally extinguish claims or disputes between the parties which are pending adjudication before the Arbitration Tribunal or a Court of Law . HELD THAT - The Learned Counsel refers to the Order dated 18.01.2022 of the Principal Bench of this Tribunal in the matter of M/S TEESTAVALLEY POWER TRANSMISSION LTD. VERSUS M/S ABIR INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL 2022 (1) TMI 1391 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI. wherein at paragraphs 3 and 4 it is observed if the arbitration proceedings result in any award in favour of the Appellant , it shall be open to the Appellant to take such remedy as permissible under the law and impugned order shall not be come in his way in execution of the Arbitral Award. On going through the Impugned Order dated 25.05.2023 in IA/239/2022 in CP(IB) No.154/BB/2017 passed by the Adjudicating Authority / Tribunal is of the considered view that the Adjudicating Authority / Tribunal based on the facts and circumstances of the instant case and also keeping in mind of the Order in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.28 of 2022 to the effect that if the Arbitration Proceedings result in any award in favour of the Appellant , it shall be open to the Appellant to take such remedy, as permissible under the law and the Impugned Order shall not come in his way in execution of the Arbitral Award came to the conclusion that the Liquidator had correctly rejected the Appellant / Applicant s claim by means of the reasons given in the letter dated 29.01.2022, considering the fact that the Liquidation was a time bound process . Appeal dismissed.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the condonation of delay in filing an appeal and the legal infirmities in the impugned order regarding termination of a contract and arbitration proceedings. Condonation of Delay Issue: The appellant sought condonation of delay in filing an appeal due to the counsel's illness and confusion regarding the appropriate tribunal. The delay of 12 days was attributed to the counsel's illness and the tribunal's closure for summer holidays. The tribunal, considering the circumstances, extended judicial leniency and allowed the appeal to proceed without costs. Termination of Contract and Arbitration Issue: The appellant, an interstate transmission licensee, entered into contracts for a transmission project. Due to delays by the consortium, the appellant terminated the contract and initiated arbitration proceedings. The appellant contended that the adjudicating authority erred in dismissing their application despite pending arbitration proceedings. The appellant argued that the termination of the contract should be subject to the arbitration outcome and that the liquidation proceedings should not extinguish pending claims. The tribunal reviewed the impugned order and concluded that the liquidator's rejection of the appellant's claim was appropriate, considering the time-bound nature of liquidation. The tribunal found the appeal devoid of merits and dismissed it without costs. Separate Judgment: No separate judgment was delivered by the judges in this case.
|
