9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 1018X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the advertisement as may be published in the newspaper calling of such application(s) with regard to resolution of 'Corporate Debtor'- AMR Infrastructure Ltd. In such case, their claim should be considered by the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and the Committee of Creditors, in accordance with the provisions of the 'I&B Code'. Therefore, no further order is required to be passed in these appeals. In case the application preferred by 'Nikhil Mehta and sons' under Section 7 of I&B Code is not found to be complete or if they fail to complete the defect, if any, as per proviso to Section 7 of I&B Code and in case the said application of 'Nikhil Mehta and Sons' is dismissed on such ground, in such case, as the appellants cannot pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi. 4. Shri Sanjay Shorey, Joint Director (Legal), Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi, appeared and filed an amended Rule 5 notified by the Central Government on 29th June, 2017 in exercise of powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with sub-section (1) of Section 239 of the I B Code. Vide this Notification, earlier Rule 5 has been substituted, and pursuant to which all petitions under Clause (e) of Section 433 of the Companies Act, 1956, which are pending before a High Court, and where petition has not been served on the respondent as required under Rule 26 of the companies (Court) Rules, 1959 has been transferred to the Bench of the Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant is not a 'Financial Creditor' and dismissed the application. 8. On the other hand, in the case of 'Mukesh Kumar and Another' [Appellants in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 50 of 2017], they claimed to be 'Operational Creditor'. Their claim was also not accepted by the learned Adjudicating Authority who dismissed the application giving rise to the aforesaid two appeals. 9. The claim of the appellants in two appeals, 'Sanjiv Kumar' and 'Mukesh Kumar and another', is that they are the creditors of Respondent-AMR Infrastructure Ltd. The respondent has not filed any affidavit disputing the same. 10. In these appeals, we were required to determine the question as to whether one or ot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be given seven days' time to complete the application as per proviso to Section 7 of the 'I B Code'. 28. The appeal is allowed with aforesaid observations and directions. However, in the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to cost. 12. As pursuant to this Appellate Tribunal's order, the application preferred by Nikhil Mehta Sons is to be admitted, and Resolution Process will be initiated, the question of initiation of further proceeding under any of the provisions of I B Code (Sections 7, 9 or 10) does not arise. The appellants herein, whether they are 'Financial Creditor' or 'Operational Creditor' or 'Secured Creditor' or 'Unsecured Creditor', as claim to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
