9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 1086X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was required to be ordered upon in 14 days with Limited Notice to the Corporate Debtor. When above interim order was passed, the matter has been carried to this Tribunal and on 10th August, 2020 relying on the judgment of V. Padmakumar Vs. Stressed Assets Stabilisation Fund Anr. [ 2020 (3) TMI 1244 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI] , the appeal was sought to be entertained. This Tribunal had then granted stay to the hearing before the Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority which is basically dealing with the matter in summary manner, is not bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice and can regulate its own procedure. Even if ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Cheema ] The Officiating Chairperson And [ Dr. Alok Srivastava ] Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : Mr. Arun Kathpalia, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajnish Sinha, Ms. Shreya Kohli, Ms. Akshaya Ganpath and Ms. Kauser Husain, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. Ajit Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kumar Anurag Singh and Zain A. Khan, Advocates ORDER (Virtual Mode) This Appeal has been filed by the Appellant Corporate Debtor against the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in CP (IB) No. 159/CTB/2019. The impugned order reads as under: ORDER Ld. Counsels for the petitioner and respondent are present. The matter has been part heard. Ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wed. It is argued that no such application was filed and that it would be necessary that the Adjudicating Authority should record reasons for passing of such orders for discovery. It is stated that the impugned order which has been passed, is not a speaking order and apart from that it is stated that the documents are accessible to the Operational Creditor as can be seen from the notices sent to the various authorities including Hon ble Prime Minister. It is argued that there are documents on record showing that there are disputes pending between the parties since 2016. The Learned Senior Counsel relied on the judgment in the matter of Assistant Commissioner vs Shukla Brothers , 2010 4 SCC 785. Referring to the said judgment, the Learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n view Section 9 of the IBC, it was required to be ordered upon in 14 days with Limited Notice to the Corporate Debtor. When above interim order was passed, the matter has been carried to this Tribunal and on 10th August, 2020 relying on the judgment of V. Padmakumar Vs. Stressed Assets Stabilisation Fund Anr. , the appeal was sought to be entertained. This Tribunal had then granted stay to the hearing before the Adjudicating Authority. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent is submitting that subsequently judgment relied on of this Tribunal has been set aside by the Hon ble Supreme Court in Assets Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd. vs. Bishal Jaiswal Anr , Civil Appeal No. 323 of 2021, vide judgment dated 15th April, 2021. 6. Sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efault or deciding it ex parte; (g) setting aside any order of dismissal of any representation for default or any order passed by it ex parte; and (h) any other matter which may be prescribed. 7. It is clear from the above that the Adjudicating Authority which is basically dealing with the matter in summary manner, is not bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice and can regulate its own procedure. Even if Order XI Rule 12 of CPC may be prescribing that any party may without filing affidavit apply to the Court for Discovery of Documents, the same does not stop the Adjudicating Authority from regulating own procedure reading sub-section (2) with sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt must reflect what weighed with the Court in granting or declining relief claimed by the Applicant. These observations are binding. However, in the present matter the Adjudicating Authority was not granting or declining relief. It is only an order at interlocutory stage of hearing the matter, where the Adjudicating Authority having power to regulate its own procedure gave a direction to produce particular documents. The impugned order, as reproduced above, speaks for itself of the mind of the Adjudicating Authority. It is apparent that for hearing the matter, the Adjudicating Authority needed a particular document which is even otherwise admittedly a public document. If that was so, there was no good reason to file the present appeal an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
