2024 (1) TMI 964 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

CIRP - Principles of natural justice - refusal to give another opportunity to the Appellant to file a reply and the right to reply involving settlement discussions - HELD THAT - It is not needed to enter into emails sent by the parties since the Adjudicating Authority has given sufficient opportunity to the Appellant to file a reply which has not yet been filed, we see no error in the order impugned refusing to give another opportunity to Appellant to file a reply. However, it shall be open for the Appellant to make submissions before the Adjudicating Authority and with the leave of the Adjudicating Authority may also file written submissions. There is no merit in the Appeal - The Appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The judgment deals with the issue of refusal by the Adjudicating Authority to grant another opportunity to the Appellant to file a reply and the striking off of the right to reply.

Details of the Judgment:

*Issue 1: Refusal to Grant Another Opportunity to File a Reply*
The Appellant sought another chance to file a reply after the Adjudicating Authority struck off the right to reply due to non-submission. The Appellant's counsel argued that the Appellant's conduct was bona fide and requested for another opportunity based on talks of settlement. However, the Respondent's counsel highlighted multiple instances where the Corporate Debtor failed to file a reply despite extensions granted by the Adjudicating Authority.

*Issue 2: Compliance with Previous Orders*
The Respondent's counsel presented orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority on various dates directing the Corporate Debtor to file a reply within specified timelines. These orders indicated that the Corporate Debtor was given multiple opportunities to respond, but failed to do so, leading to the eventual striking off of the right to reply.

*Issue 3: Adjudicating Authority's Decision*
The Adjudicating Authority refused to grant another opportunity to the Appellant to file a reply, citing the history of non-compliance with previous orders. The Authority emphasized that despite sufficient chances given, the Appellant had not submitted a reply. The Appellant's subsequent arguments and emails were not considered as the Adjudicating Authority had already provided ample opportunities for compliance.

*Conclusion:*
The Appellate Tribunal upheld the decision of the Adjudicating Authority, stating that the Appellant had been given adequate chances to file a reply but failed to do so. The Tribunal dismissed the Appeal, affirming the Authority's ruling on the matter. The Appellant was advised to make submissions before the Adjudicating Authority if desired, with the possibility of filing written submissions with the Authority's permission.