9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (4) TMI 438 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyCIRP - Admissibility of two additional documents - Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act - rejection of Application of the Appellant seeking permission to bring additional documents - the arbitration petition and the order were both initiated after the filing of the Section 9 Application - HELD THAT - Notice under Section 8 was issued by the Operational Creditor on 05.05.2022, which was also replied by the Corporate Debtor. Section 9 Application was filed being CP(IB)No.36/CB/2022 by the Operational Creditor in the year 2022, to which reply was also filed by the Corporate Debtor. Arbitration proceedings before the Hon ble Calcutta High Court in BALASORE ALLOYS LIMITED VERSUS MSTC LIMITED 2023 (9) TMI 1457 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT under Section 11, sub-section (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was initiated on 31.08.2023, on which an order was passed by the Hon ble Calcutta High Court on 13.09.2023. Both the Arbitration Application and order of the Hon ble Calcutta High Court, which were sought to be brought on record by the Corporate Debtor, were much subsequent to filing of Section 9 Application. The observation of the Hon ble Supreme Court in MSTC LIMITED VERSUS BALASORE ALLOYS LIMITED 2023 (11) TMI 1245 - SC ORDER , clearly indicate that arbitration order passed in the arbitration proceedings shall not affect proceedings in Section 9 Application under the Code, which was filed by the Operational Creditor. There are no error in order of the Adjudicating Authority rejecting application filed by the Appellant to bring on record two documents - Appeal is dismissed.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case are the dismissal of an application by the Corporate Debtor for accepting additional documents by the National Company Law Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, and the subsequent appeal challenging this decision. Brief facts: The Corporate Debtor and Operational Creditor entered into an agreement for the purchase and sale of various procurement items. The Operational Creditor issued a Demand Notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, regarding an outstanding amount. The Corporate Debtor filed a reply and a Company Petition under Section 9 was filed by the Operational Creditor. Subsequently, the Corporate Debtor initiated arbitration proceedings before the High Court of Calcutta seeking the appointment of a sole arbitrator. The Supreme Court dismissed a Special Leave Petition challenging the High Court's order, stating that it would not affect the pending insolvency proceedings. Judgment details: The Corporate Debtor filed an application before the Adjudicating Authority to bring on record an arbitration petition and the High Court's order related to the arbitration proceedings. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed this application, stating that the additional documents were not just and necessary for the Section 9 application. The Corporate Debtor appealed this decision. Court's analysis: The Corporate Debtor argued that the Adjudicating Authority erred in rejecting the application for additional documents, as these documents were necessary for the adjudication of the Section 9 Application. However, the Operational Creditor contended that the arbitration proceedings were initiated after the Section 9 Application and the additional documents were not relevant to the ongoing proceedings. Decision: The Tribunal considered the submissions of both parties and examined the records. It noted that the arbitration proceedings and related documents were initiated after the Section 9 Application. The Supreme Court's observation that the arbitration order would not affect the insolvency proceedings clarified that the additional documents were not required for the Section 9 Application. The Tribunal found no error in the Adjudicating Authority's decision to reject the application for additional documents and dismissed the appeal. Conclusion: The Tribunal upheld the Adjudicating Authority's decision and dismissed the appeal by the Corporate Debtor, stating that the additional documents were not essential for the ongoing insolvency proceedings.
|
