2021 (4) TMI 493 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Maintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - existence of debt and dispute or not - Financial Creditors - HELD THAT - The Instant Appeal was filed before this Hon ble Tribunal on 19.03.2021, after expiry of the date fixed by the Learned Adjudicating Authority - This shows that the Appellant was not serious in pursuing his remedy before the Learned Adjudicating Authority. There are no reason to interfere with the Impugned Order - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:

1. Compliance with the order dated 16th February, 2021 passed by the Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority, National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi.
2. Application under Section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 filed by the Financial Creditor against the Corporate Debtor.
3. Failure to file a reply affidavit within the specified time frame.
4. Imposition of costs for non-compliance with orders.
5. Engagement of new counsel and subsequent filing of a fresh Vakalatnama.
6. Request for setting aside the imposed cost and reopening the right to file a reply affidavit.
7. Allegations of professional negligence against the earlier counsel.
8. Delay in pursuing the remedy before the Adjudicating Authority.
9. Decision on the appeal and affirmation of the Impugned Order.

Analysis:

The instant appeal involved the compliance with an order dated 16th February, 2021 passed by the Hon'ble Adjudicating Authority, National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi. The Financial Creditor had filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against the Corporate Debtor, claiming an overdue amount. Despite multiple opportunities and extensions granted by the Tribunal, the Corporate Debtor failed to file a reply affidavit within the stipulated time frame, citing reasons such as the COVID-19 pandemic and professional negligence of the earlier counsel. The new counsel was engaged, and a fresh Vakalatnama was filed, seeking to set aside the imposed costs and reopen the right to file a reply affidavit.

The Tribunal noted the lack of seriousness on the part of the Appellant in pursuing the remedy before the Adjudicating Authority, as evidenced by the delayed filing of the appeal after the fixed date. After considering the submissions and the records, the Tribunal affirmed the Impugned Order and dismissed the appeal, stating that there was no reason to interfere with the decision. The Registry was directed to upload the judgment on the Appellate Tribunal's website and send a copy to the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench. The decision was based on the failure to comply with orders, the delay in pursuing the remedy, and the lack of grounds to overturn the Impugned Order.