9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 286X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on order dated 10.04.2019 passed by this Hon'ble Tribunal in the captioned matter. 2. The facts that led to the filing of the present application are as follows: a. The Corporate Debtor manages a business process outsourcing business which deals with various factors connected to the IT/ITes industry and based on the reputation of Operational Creditor/Respondent, the Applicant agreed to use the system/resources of the Respondent for running BPO and has made extensive investment to attract the foreign clientele/business. However, applicant noticed the deficiencies and these deficiencies were not rectified even after one month from the commencement of operation. b. It is submitted that the applicant entered into facilities management ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e nor petition was ever served upon the applicant, despite the fact that the management of operational creditor had several email addresses of all the relevant officer of the corporate debtor. e. It is further averred that several high value and high-risk transaction got stopped mid-way due to sudden announcement of CIR Process of Applicant. It is stated that no-payment whatsoever, is due and payable to the Operational Creditor, due to the fact that supply of deficient goods has always been the hall-mark of their business and the entire proceedings before the Hon'ble NCLT has been a sham proceeding. f. It is the case of the applicant that the CIR Process is wholly infructuous as the same has been carried out behind the back of Appli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate Tribunal about the service of notice by email, the Hon'ble Appellate Tribunal still went ahead and set aside the Ex-parte order in the interest of justice. It is further stated that the application in the present form is maintainable and relied on the Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in Pruthvirajsinh Nodhunba Jadeja (D) by LRs vs. Jayesh Kumar Chhakadas Shah & Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 10521 of 2013] dated 04.10.2019. It was held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that non-mentioning of a provision of law does not prove to be fatal to the application. Hence, prayed that Applicant has a good case on merits and it shall be allowed to defend its case in the interest of justice and equity. 5. The Respondent/Operational Creditor has also relied ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... keeping in view the submissions made by the respondent. 6. We have heard the Counsels for both the parties length, perused the averments made in the Application before us, as also the Case Laws relied upon by both the parties. In the case before us, it is seen that the Order dated 10.4.2019 admitting Applicant herein to CIRP has been passed after firstly holding the Applicant as ex-parte to the proceedings before this Authority on 8.2.2019. The present Application has been filed by the Corporate Debtor on 10.6.2019 i.e., after two months after the date of admission of CIRP. On careful reading of the present Application, it is more than clear that the applicant seeks to recall/review of the Admission Order dated 10.4.2019 along with the ex- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
