9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 771X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct, is followed. The Central Government is directed to adopt procedure under Section 213 (b) of The Companies Act, 2013 and Central Government may get the affairs of the Companies investigated by an Inspector or Inspectors appointed by the Central Government and take further necessary steps as per law - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.871/2020 - - - Dated:- 15-4-2021 - [Justice A.I.S. Cheema] Member (Judicial) And [Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Shri Vishal Mittal, Sr. Penal Counsel For the Respondents : Ms. Chaitra Bhat and Shri Sanjay Gupta, Advocates (R-1) Ms. Puja Priyadarshini Thakur, Advocate (R -5) ORDER (Virtual Mode) Heard. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ernment, within a period of three weeks from the receipt of the copy of the order with a copy to all concerned parties duly following principles of natural justice. (2) The Central Government is directed to refer the matter to the SFIO for further investigation into the Affairs of the Corporate Debtor namely M/s. BCIL Red Earth Developers India Private Limited, Shri Hariharan Chandrashekhar, Ms. Kanchan Kaur, Shri Sanjay Ramanujam and M/s. Promptech Incorporated and other related Persons and Companies including Director of Companies of Corporate Debtor related Companies, basing on the Review Report, as expeditiously as possible. (3) The parties are at liberty to take appropriate legal course of action basing on the ultimate fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is present and she submits that she has no objection if the present Appeal is allowed. Other Respondents are stated to be served but none present. 7. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant has relied on the Judgement in the matter of Mr. Lagadapati Ramesh Vs. Mrs. Ramanathan Bhuvaneshwari in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.574 of 2019 dated 20th September, 2019 where this Tribunal had in similar matter, observed in Paragraphs 42 and 43 as under:- 42. In view of the aforesaid position of law, we are of the view that the Adjudicating Authority was not competent to straight away direct any investigation to be conducted by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office . However, the Adjudicating Authority (Tribunal) being competent to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of a company having a share capital; or (ii) not less than one-fifth of the persons on the company s register of members, in the case of a company having no share capital, and supported by such evidence as may be necessary for the purpose of showing that the applicants have good reasons for seeking an order for conducting an investigation into the affairs of the company; or (b) on an application made to it by any other person or otherwise, if it is satisfied that there are circumstances suggesting that- (i) the business of the company is being conducted with intent to defraud its creditors, members or any other person or otherwise for a fraudulent or unlawful purpose, or in a manner oppressive to any of its memb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion therewith been guilty of fraud, then, every officer of the company who is in default and the person or persons concerned in the formation of the company or the management of its affairs shall be punishable for fraud in the manner as provided in section 447. 11. Considering the above Section as well as the Judgement relied on by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, it appears to us that an error has occurred when Adjudicating Authority gave directions to send matter to SFIO which needs to be corrected so that the proper procedure as required under Section 213 of the Companies Act, is followed. 12 (A). For the above reasons, we allow the Appeal. In the Impugned Order, we modify sub-para - (2) of para - 12 of the Impugned Order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
