9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 476X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HELD THAT:- It is pertinently pointed out by this Tribunal that the employment of the word Shall raises a presumption that specific provision is imperative - It is worthwhile to mention that Rule 57 (2) of Schedule 2 to the Income Tax Act, 1961, provides that the full amount of purchase money payable shall be paid by the Purchaser to the Tax Officer on or before 15th day from the date of Sale of Property. Effect of Moratorium its Breach - HELD THAT:- A mere running of the eye of the word Shall employed in Section 14 (1) of the I B Code, 2016, symbolises that on declaration of Moratorium, it is mandatory for the Adjudicating Authority to pass an Order prohibiting the filing or continuation of pending Suits or Proceedings; against the Corporate Debtor. In this connection, this Tribunal points out that when a Statute employs the word Shall ex facie, it is mandatory. As per Section 14 (4) of the Code, the Order of Moratorium is to have effect from the date of such an Order till the completion of Corporate Insolvency and Resolution Process. However, during the Corporate Insolvency and Resolution Process, if the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) approves the Resolution Plan as pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er (Judicial) : I.A. No. 682 of 2022 (in Company Appeal (AT) (INS) No. 1038 of 2020): The Applicant / Appellant (ArcelorMittal India Private Limited) in I.A. No. 682 of 2022 has filed the present `Application seeking `stayof the Proceedings in main Comp. App (AT) INS No. 1038 of 2020, arising out of the `Common Order dated 10.11.2020, passed by the `Adjudicating Authority , (`National Company Law Tribunal , Court I, Ahmedabad Bench) in I.A.Nos. 245, 284, 285, 348 and 349 of 2020 in CP (IB)/39 40 of 2017. Applicant/Appellant s Contentions (in I.A. No. 682 of 2022 in Comp. App (AT) (INS) No. 1038 of 2020): 2. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant submits that on04.10.2021 during the pendency of the present proceedings, the Reserve Bank of India, in exercise of its power under Section 45-IE of the Reserve Bank of India, Act, 1934, as had superseded the Board of Directors of the 1st Respondent / SREI Infrastructure Finance Limited and appointed Mr. Rajneesh Sharma, as an Administrator of the 1st Respondent. Furthermore, according to the Applicant/Appellant, the Three Member Advisory Committee was constituted to assist the Administrator of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e during CIRP or on the basis of events arising after closure of CIRP ? 8. The Learned Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant contends that in view of the fact that the `Civil Appeals raises similar questions of law and hence, the `Adjudication thereof will have a direct bearing on the present proceedings. Moreover, it is the stance of the Applicant/Appellant that since the Hon ble Supreme Court of India is already seized of these issues (including whether the Resolution Plan, which was finally approved by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India and later implemented, can be unsettled by entertaining Petitions, filed by a Third Party), it is necessary and in the interests of justice that the present proceedings may be kept in abeyance until the `Adjudication of the present `Appeals by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India. Added further, if the present proceedings are not stayed, any adjudication of the present proceedings will not only render the Civil Appeals pending before the Hon ble Supreme Court of India as an infructuous one, but also adversely affect the Applicant/Appellant s interests. 9. The Learned Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant points out that the Hon ble Supreme C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interventions being IA No.95649 of 2021 (Appellant / AMIPL), IA No.709 of 2022 and IA No.100703 of 2021 (`AMNS ) were filed and pending before the Hon ble Supreme Court of India. 13. The Learned Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant comes out with a plea that the substantive legal and factual issues raised in the Resolution Professional s Appeal before the Hon ble Supreme Court of India also arise in the instant proceedings as depicted in the Tabular Form which runs as under: RP Appeal Present Proceedings Question of Law (iv) Whether a determination of CIRP costs made by the resolution professional during the pendency L. Whether, In the absence of any challenge to the determination of the CIRP Costs by the RP during the course of the entire CIRP, the Adjudicating Authority could have held a particular claim to be CIRP Costs much after the closure of the process? of the CIRP can be challenged subsequently, under Section 60 (5) of the I B Code or otherwise, after conclusion of the CIRP and after successful implementation of the resolution plan specially when ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the moment an insolvency petition is admitted, the moratorium that comes into effect under Section 14(1)(a) expressly interdicts institution or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against Corporate Debtors. 6. This being the case, we are surprised that an arbitration proceeding has been purported to be started after the imposition of the said moratorium and appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act are being entertained. Therefore, we set aside the order of the District Judge dated 06.07.2017 and further state that the effect of Section 14(1)(a) is that the arbitration that has been instituted after the aforesaid moratorium is non est in law. 7. Mr. Jayant Bhushan, learned Senior Counsel, also informs us that criminal proceeding being F.I.R. No. 0605 dated 06.08.2017 has been taken in a desperate attempt to see that the IRP does not continue with the proceedings under the Insolvency Code which are strictly time bound. We quash this proceeding. 8. As a result, the appeal is allowed and the steps that have to be taken under the Insolvency Code will continue unimpeded by any order of any other Court. 17. The Learned Counsel for the Applicant/Appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Additional Solicitor General, relied upon the judgment in State of Assam v. Ranga Mahammad, (1967) 1 SCR 454. The Court was concerned with the meaning of the expression posting which occurs in Article 233 of the Constitution, qua District Judges in a State. Applying the doctrine of noscitur a sociis, this Court held that given the fact that the expression posting comes in between appointment and promotion of District Judges, it is clear that a narrower meaning has to be assigned to it, namely, that of assigning someone to a post which would not include transfer . Quite apart from the positioning of the word posting in between appointment and promotion , from which it took its colour, even otherwise, Articles 234 and 235 of the Constitution would make it clear that since transfer of District Judges is with the High Court and not with the State Government, quite obviously, the expression posting could not be used in its wider sense see pages 460 and 461. This judgment is an early application of the rule of noscitur a sociis, given the position of a wider word between two narrow words, and more importantly, the reading of other allied provisions in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . (AIR p. 614, para 9) (emphasis in original) 79. We do not read this passage as excluding the application of the principle of noscitur a sociis to the present case since it has been amply demonstrated with reference to authority that the meaning of the word luxury in Entry 62 is doubtful and has been defined and construed in different senses. xxx xxxxxx 81. We are aware that the maxim of noscitur a sociis may be a treacherous one unless the societas to which the socii belong, are known. The risk may be present when there is no other factor except contiguity to suggest the societas . But where there is, as here, a term of wide denotation which is not free from ambiguity, the addition of the words such as including is sufficiently indicative of the societas. As we have said, the word includes in the present context indicates a commonality or shared features or attributes of the including word with the included. xxx xxxxxx 83. Hence on an application of general principles of interpretation, we would hold that the word luxuries in Entry 62 of List II means the activity of enjoyment of or indulgence in that which is costly or which is g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e specific words exhaust the class, then rejection of the rule may be favoured because its adoption would make the general words unnecessary; if, however, the specific words do not exhaust the class, then adoption of the rule may be favoured because its rejection would make the specific words unnecessary. [See: Construction of Statutes by E.A. Driedger p. 95 quoted by Francis Bennion in his Statutory Construction, pp. 829 and 830.] 28. Relying upon the observations made by Francis Bennion in his Statutory Construction and English decision in Magnhild v. McIntyre Bros. Co. [(1920) 3 KB 321] and those rendered by this Court in Tribhuban Parkash Nayyar v. Union of India [(1969) 3 SCC 99], U.P. SEB v. Hari Shankar Jain [(1978) 4 SCC 16 : 1978 SCC (L S) 481], His Lordship summed up the legal principle in the following words: (Siddeshwari Cotton Mills case [(1989) 2 SCC 458 : 1989 SCC (Tax) 297], SCC p. 464, para 19) 19. The preceding words in the statutory provision which, under this particular rule of construction, control and limit the meaning of the subsequent words must represent a genus or a family which admits of a number of species or members. If there is only o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tract with an employer whether the contract be by way of manual labour, clerical work `or otherwise and said: The use of the words `or otherwise does not bring into play the ejusdem generis principle: for `manual labour and `clerical work do not belong to a single limited genus' and Lord Wright in the same case said: `The ejusdem generis rule is often useful or convenient, but it is merely a rule of construction, not a rule of law. In the present case it is entirely inapt. It presupposes a genus but here the only genus is a contract with an employer . (emphasis supplied) 30. The above passage was quoted with approval by this Court in Grasim Industries Ltd. v. Collector of Customs [(2002) 4 SCC 297] holding that Note 1(a) of Chapter 84 relevant to that case was clear and unambiguous. It did not speak of a class, category or genus followed by general words making the rule of ejusdem generis inapplicable. xxx xxxxxx 32. This would mean that the term person appearing in Section 364-A IPC would include a company or association or body of persons whether incorporated or not, apart from natural persons. The tenor of the provision, the context and the stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he IBC, which was introduced by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2020, to argue that the first proviso to Section 32A(1) would make it clear that prosecutions that had been instituted during the corporate insolvency resolution process against a corporate debtor will result in a discharge of the corporate debtor from the prosecution, subject to the other requirements of sub-section (1) having been fulfilled. According to him, therefore, a prosecution of the corporate debtor under Section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be instituted during the corporate insolvency resolution process, making it clear that such prosecutions are, therefore, outside the ken of the moratorium provisions contained in Section 14 of the IBC. Section 32A(1) of the IBC reads as follows: 32A. Liability for prior offences, etc.(1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Code or any other law for the time being in force, the liability of a corporate debtor for an offence committed prior to the commencement of the corporate insolvency resolution process shall cease, and the corporate debtor shall not be prosecuted for such an offence from the date the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated parties of the corporate debtor from proposing a resolution plan and purchasing the property of the corporate debtor in the CIRP and liquidation process, respectively. Thus, in most cases, the provisions of the Code effectuate a change in control of the corporate debtor that results in a clean break of the corporate debtor from its erstwhile management. However, the legal form of the corporate debtor continues in the CIRP, and may be preserved in the resolution plan. Additionally, while the property of the corporate debtor may also change hands upon resolution or liquidation, such property also continues to exist, either as property of the corporate debtor, or in the hands of the purchaser. 17.2. However, even after commencement of CIRP or after its successful resolution or liquidation, the corporate debtor, along with its property, would be susceptible to investigations or proceedings related to criminal offences committed by it prior to the commencement of a CIRP, leading to the imposition of certain liabilities and restrictions on the corporate debtor and its properties even after they were lawfully acquired by a resolution applicant or a successful bidder, respectivel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agement of the corporate debtor, unless they themselves were involved in the commission of the offence, or were related parties, promoters or other persons in management and control of the corporate debtor at the time of or any time following the commission of the offence, and could acquire the corporate debtor, notwithstanding the prohibition under Section 29A. 17.7. Thus, the Committee agreed that a new Section should be inserted to provide that where the corporate debtor is successfully resolved, it should not be held liable for any offence committed prior to the commencement of the CIRP, unless the successful resolution applicant was also involved in the commission of the offence, or was a related party, promoter or other person in management and control of the corporate debtor at the time of or any time following the commission of the offence. 17.8. Notwithstanding this, those persons who were responsible to the corporate debtor for the conduct of its business at the time of the commission of such offence, should continue to be liable for such an offence, vicariously or otherwise, regardless of the fact that the corporate debtor s liability has ceased. (emphas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice to any other provision of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both: Provided that nothing contained in this Section shall apply unless__ (a) the cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier; (b) the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, within thirty days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid; and (c) the drawer of such cheque fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te debtor being upheld, as a result of which, monies would then be payable by the corporate debtor. A Section 34 proceeding is a proceeding against the corporate debtor in a court of law pertaining to a challenge to an arbitral award and would be covered just as an appellate proceeding in a decree from a suit would be covered. This judgment does not, therefore, state the law correctly. 18. The Learned Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant seeks in aid of the Judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India dated 08.09.2021 in Anjali Rathi and Ors. V Today Homes and Infrastructure Private Limited Ors., (vide SLP (C) No. 12150 of 2019 with Civil Appeal No. 5231-38 of 2019 Anjali Rathi Etc. V Today Homes and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. with SLP (C)_ of 2021 (arising out of SLP (C) Diary No. 45043 of 2019 Varun Gupta and Ors., V Today Homes and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Anr.), wherein at paragraphs 8, 14, 15 and 16, it is observed as under:- 8. Thereafter, the petitioners lodged their claims before the Resolution Professional10, though without prejudice to their contentions in the proceedings pending before this Court. The RP issued an Information Memorandum to prospective R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aking through Justice Rohinton F Nariman, the Court held: 102. Since the corporate debtor would be covered by the moratorium provision contained in Section 14 IBC, by which continuation of Sections 138/141 proceedings against the corporate debtor and initiation of Sections 138/141 proceedings against the said debtor during the corporate insolvency resolution process are interdicted, what is stated in paras 51 and 59 in AneetaHada [AneetaHada v. Godfather Travels Tours (P) Ltd., (2012) 5 SCC 661 : (2012) 3 SCC (Civ) 350 : (2012) 3 SCC (Cri) 241] would then become applicable. The legal impediment contained in Section 14 IBC would make it impossible for such proceeding to continue or be instituted against the corporate debtor. Thus, for the period of moratorium, since no Sections 138/141 proceeding can continue or be initiated against the corporate debtor because of a statutory bar, such proceedings can be initiated or continued against the persons mentioned in Sections 141(1) and (2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act. This being the case, it is clear that the moratorium provision contained in Section 14 IBC would apply only to the corporate debtor, the natural persons mention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at in view of the express prohibition in Section 14 of the I B Code, 2016, for any continuation of any proceedings by or against the Corporate Debtor and because of the pendency of the Resolution Professional s Appeal, which is directly, substantially and holistically on the same grounds as in the instant proceedings, the Stay Application is to be allowed and the reliefs sought by the Applicant thereunder be granted. 1st Respondent s Submissions (in I.A. No. 682 of 2022 in Comp. App (AT) (INS) No. 1038 of 2020 and I.A. No. 673 of 2022 in Comp. App (AT) (INS) No. 1043 of 2020) : 23. According to the Learned Senior Counsel for the 1st Respondent / SREI Infrastructure Finance Limited that the ArcelorMittal India Private Limited and ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel India Limited have assailed the Judgment and Order dated 10.11.2020, passed by the `Adjudicating Authority (`National Company Law Tribunal , Kolkata Bench) in Comp. App (AT) (INS) No. 1038 of 2020 and Comp. App (AT) (INS) No. 1043 of 2020. 24. The Learned Counsel for the 1st Respondent submits that the 1st Respondent/ SREI Infrastructure Finance Limited is currently undergoing `Corporate Insolvency Resolution Proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... according to the 1st Respondent, if the instant Appealsare allowed, the 1st Respondent/SREI will gain nothing and lose nothing and in the event of the present Appealsare dismissed, 1st Respondent / SREI will be benefitted as the RTU Charges payment will add to its Assets. 27. The Learned Counsel for the 1st Respondent urges before this `Tribunal , that the Applicant/Appellant s reliance of the observations made in paragraph 97 of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of P. Mohanraj Others. V Shah Brothers IspatPvt. Ltd. 2021 (6) SCC 258 ispertinent, because the observations made in paragraph 97 is a finding on the basis of the test extracted supra and that the Hon ble Supreme Court of India had observed that continuation of proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 might result in `confirmation of an `Award against the `Corporate Debtor which can be executed. 28. According to the Learned Counsel for the 1st Respondent,the decision in the matter of Alchemist Asset Reconstruction Company 2018 (16) SCC 94 is in applicable to the facts of the instant case, since Alchemist case, Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by this Hon ble Court); (b) In directing the Hon ble Adjudicating Authorities and the Hon ble Appellate Tribunal to refrain from issuing notice and/or calling upon an (erstwhile) resolution professional in a proceeding which arise after the culmination of the corporate insolvency resolution process; 32. The Learned Counsel for the 1st Respondent comes out with an argument that an `Adjudicating Authority and the `Appellate Tribunal are to examine whether the proceeding will result in upsetting or re-opening an approved Resolution Plan and this contention is still available to the `AM India (Applicant/Appellant) and `AM Nippon (2nd Respondent). Moreover, the 1st Respondent (SREI) is seeking `implementation of the `Resolution Plan for the `ESIL and not seeking to re-open or upset it. 33. The Learned Counsel for the 1st Respondent submits that in reality, `no stay of the `instant Appeals are sought or granted in the Resolution Professional s Appeal by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India and that the Resolution Professional of the `ESIL has not applied for `deferment before this `Tribunal and the aspect of `stay / `deferment of the present Appeals at the behe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at they enjoy the Interim Relief for more than a year. 38. In so far as the contentions that (a) RTU Charges are not payable since there was no demand during CIRP of ESIL; (b) The order dated 10.11.2020 passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority holding AM India and AM Nippon liable to pay RTU Charges as CIRP Cost amounts to a hydra head popping up or upsetting the resolution plan for ESIL approved by Hon ble Supreme Court; and (c) SREI has no right to seek payment of RTU Charges as CIRP Cost since it was paid the resolution amount in ESIL s CIRP thus have no `Locus and are issues of merits that have no bearing on the `Deferment Applications . These issues can only be adjudicated at the time of final hearing of the present Appeals. Applicant/Appellant s Submissions (in I.A. No. 673 of 2022 in Comp. App (AT) (INS) No. 1043 of 2020): 39. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant contends that once the `Moratorium is in place, continuation of any `Suit or `Proceeding in any Court / Tribunal / Forum for Authority against the `Corporate Debtor shall be stayed till the completion of `Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process as per the I B Code, 2016. 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the impugned order dated 04.12.2020 and 08.12.2020, passed by by this `Tribunal in the present proceedings is impugned), `Notice was issued on 06.04.2021 and on 02.08.2021, a liberty was granted to AMIPL and AMNS to intervene in the said ESIL RP s Civil Appeal and that the Intervening Applications are pending before the Hon ble Supreme Court of India. 47. In short, the Learned Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant points out that because of the commonality of the scope and purview of both the Appeals Viz. the present Appeal and the ESIL RP s Civil Appeal is enough to grant relief of `Stay in the present proceedings. Furthermore, because of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India is seized of these issues in Civil Appeal, it is just and proper, in the interests of justice that present proceedings may be kept in abeyance, till the disposal of the ESIL RP s Civil Appeal. 48. The Learned Counsel for the Applicant/Appellant submits that the 1st Respondent/SREI has not made any endeavour to clarify the position from the Hon ble Supreme Court of India and the relief of mere deferment as prayed for by the Applicant/Appellantwill not cause any prejudice. 49. It is represented on beh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion) 2017 Vol. III at Page 3348 meaning `Authorisation of suspension of payments by a `Debtor for a specified time . 56. The term `Moratorium is described as a legal authorisation to a `Debtor to `defer the payment for a certain time as per Schedule Article 53 of the Asian Development Bank Act (18/1966). Moratorium: 57. It is aptly pointed out by this `Tribunal that the term `Moratorium ensures that `plurality of proceedings are not to take place in a simultaneous manner and help in averting the possibility of potentially contradictory / conflicting result of related proceedings, thereby ensuring that the `Resolution is a `collective one . 58. At this juncture, this `Tribunal significantly points out that the resultant effect of passing the order, in terms of the ingredients of Section 7 (5) of the I B Code, 2016, `Moratorium as prescribed under Section 14 of the Code, `Shall come into effect. Consequently, the Corporate Financial Debtor s Assets are not to be liquidated till the `Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process is completed. 59. The principle of `Moratorium is to give the `Administrator to formulate `proposals and then implement any `pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I B Code, 2016, symbolises that on declaration of `Moratorium , it is mandatory for the `Adjudicating Authority to pass an `Order prohibiting the filing or continuation of pending `Suits or `Proceedings; against the `Corporate Debtor . In this connection, this `Tribunal points out that when a `Statute employs the word `Shall `ex facie , it is mandatory. 67. Section 14 (3) of the I B Code, 2016, enjoins that the Central Government in consultation with any `Financial Sector Regulator or any other `Authority , may notify to which `Moratorium may not apply. As such, the Central Government is endowed with the `Power to look at this aspect and to delve into the realm of `exemption and to `address the same. 68. As per Section 14 (4) of the Code, the `Order of Moratorium is to have effect from the date of such an `Order till the completion of `Corporate Insolvency and Resolution Process . However, during the `Corporate Insolvency and Resolution Process , if the `Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) approves the `Resolution Plan as per Section 31 (1) of the I B Code or passes an `Order for `Liquidation of `Corporate Debtor under Section 33, the `Moratorium has to`cea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... solution Plan in respect of `Essar Steel India Limited (`ESIL ), now `AMNS , and based on the `Application projected by the 1st Respondent/SREI Infrastructure Finance Limited, the `Adjudicating Authority, had passed an `Order declaring that the `Appellant (Successful Resolution Applicant) and `AMNS (erstwhile `ESIL ) were liable to pay the RTU Charges to `OSPIL . In fact, the Appellant, `AMNS and the Resolution Professional of former `ESIL (ESIL RP) filed `Applications questioning the maintainability of the `Application filed by the 1st Respondent/SREI . Added further, the `ESIL RP had sought his deletion from the `Memo of Parties and ultimately, the `Applications were disposed of, by a `Common Order (although no specific order was passed on the reliefs sought for by the Resolution Professional of ESIL). 74. To be noted, that on 04.12.2020, this `Tribunal had issued `Notice in Comp. App (AT) (INS) No. 1038 of 2020, filed by the Appellant and granted an ad-interim stay on the operation of the `impugned order . 75. Also that, the 3rd Respondent / ESIL RP (in Comp. App (AT) (INS) No. 1038 of 2020) assailed the `impugned order dated 04.12.2020 and also the `Order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... `Appeals will not result in `depletion or `diminution of the 1st Respondent/SREI s Assets. 82. Continuing further, it is the stand of the 1st Respondent/SREI before this `Tribunal that the 1st Respondent/SREI will neither gain nor lose anything, in the event of the instant `Appeals are ultimately allowed.Conversely, if the `Appeals are dismissed by this `Tribunal , then the 1st Respondent/SREI will be the `Beneficiary because of the fact that the payment of `RTU Charges will enhance its `Assets . 83. According to the 1st Respondent/SREI, before the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal Nos. 1015 1016 of 2021 between Satish Kumar Gupta v. SREI Infrastructure Finance Limited, through its Authorised Representative and Others, there is no prayer for `Stay in respect of the hearing of the instant `Appeals or `Stay of the proceedings before this `Tribunal and that the `Statutory Appeals cannot be put on hold because of the fact that similar legal grounds are raised before the Hon ble Supreme Court of India. Besides this, the final determination of these `Appeals is not to be stifled to await for the issuance of declarations by the Hon ble Supreme Court of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
