9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 833X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... djudicating Authority ought not to have dismissed the Application on such technical grounds. Having regard to the aforenoted Board Resolution dated 29.01.2019 and also the provisions of Section 9 sub-section (5) of the Code, the impugned order is set aside and this Appeal is allowed and the Adjudicating Authority shall decide the Admission/Rejection of the Application as expeditiously as applicable keeping in view that the Application is of the Year 2019. The Registry is directed to upload the Judgement on the website of this Tribunal and send a copy of this Judgement to the Learned Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai) forthwith. - COMPANY APPEAL (AT) (INSOLVENCY) No. 828 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 18-4-2022 - [ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion by definition means the making valid of an act already done. The principle is derived from the Latin maxim ratihabitio mandato aequiparatur, namely, a subsequent ratification of an act is equivalent to a prior authority to perform such act. Therefore, ratification assumes an invlaid act which is retrospectively validated. 10.In view of the law laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court, Counsel for the Petitioner emphasised by subsequent ratification by the Board of Directors it shall be presumed that Board has initially authorised Ms Meetu Bajaj for filing insolvency APetition. 11. It is to be clarified that to initiate proceeding under Section 9 of the Code, notice under Section 8 is mandatory. After sending the valid notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 17, wherein, Ms Meetu Bajaj, Legal Counsel and Company Secretary of the Appellant Company was authorised to initiate proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority, but the said Resolution did not expressly state that she is authorised to initiate CIRP proceedings under the Code. Hence the Board of Directors of the Appellant Company in their Meeting held on 29.01.2019 expressly authorised Ms Meetu Bajaj to institute proceedings under IB Code 2016 before any of the Benches of the NCLT as well as before NCLAT. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant drew our attention to the certified copy of the Resolution dated 29.01.2019 alongwith Additional Affidavit of February, 2019 The Learned Counsel further contended that the Adjudicating Authority e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Minutes of the Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Appellant Company held on 29.01.2019 clearly shows that Ms Meetu Bajaj, Legal Counsel and Company Secretary of the Appellant Company was authorised to file Petitions in NCLT as well as NCLAT. The relevant Extract of the Minutes is detailed as hereunder:- ii. Ms Meetu Bajaj, Legal Counsel and Company Secretary, be and is hereby authorised to execute power of attorney and to issue of letter(s) of authority, vakalatnama and any other document thereby delegating, empowering and authorising any employee of the Company or any other person to do any or all acts, deeds and exercise powers as are envisaged in the above resolution in the matter of filing of an instituting legal procee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y shall, within fourteen days of the receipt of the application under sub-section (2), by an order- (i)admit the application and communicate such decision to the operational creditor and the corporate debtor if,- (a) the application made under sub-section (2) is complete; (b) there is no 3 [payment] of the unpaid operational debt; (c) the invoice or notice for payment to the corporate debtor has been delivered by the operational creditor; (d) no notice of dispute has been received by the operational creditor or there is no record of dispute in the information utility; and (e) there is no disciplinary proceeding pending against any resolution professional proposed under sub-section (4), if any; (ii) reject ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
