9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 930X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... imited, as a viable one. In the teeth of Lack of Bonafide, on the part of the Petitioner / Appellant, the leave sought in Company appeal, in preferring the instant Appeal sans merits - appeal dismissed. - IA No. 771 of 2022 in Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 341 of 2022 - - - Dated:- 21-10-2022 - [Justice M. Venugopal] Member (Judicial) And [Naresh Salecha] Member (Technical) For the Petitioner / : Mr. N.L. Rajah, Senior Advocate Appellant / Resolution For Mr. Tahura Anzar, Advocate Applicant For the Respondent No. 1 / : Mr. PH. Arvindh Pandian, Senior Advocate Resolution Professional For Mr. Anant Merathia, Advocate and R2 For the Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Thriyambak Kannan, Advocate For the Caveator : Mr. A. Murali, Advocate ORDER (Virtual Mode) Justice M. Venugopal, Member (Judicial): According to the Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant, that the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant was not made a party to IA No. 132 of 2020 in CP (IB) No. 228 / BB / 2018, before the `Adjudicating Authority (`National Company Law Tribunal , Bengaluru Bench, Bengaluru), therefore, the `Petitioner / App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Plan submitted by `Bipin Textile Processing Industries Private Ltd. was not considered. 5. The Learned Counsel for the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant , refers to the Order of the Hon ble High Court dated 27.02.2020, wherein by the `consent of the Parties , quashed the `Final Order dated 03.01.2020 in W.P. No. 50370 / 2019 and had restored the `Writ Petition , to its file for reconsideration of the said `Petition and had kept all the questions open to be decided on merits. 6. The Learned Counsel for the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant , adverts to the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in VAREED JACOB V. SOSAMMA GEEVARGHESE AND OTHERS, reported in 2004, 6 SCC 378, wherein it is held that ``interlocutory orders which have been passed before the dismissal would stand revived along with the suit when the dismissal is set aside and the suit is restored unless the court expressly or by implication excludes the operation of interlocutory orders passed during the period between the dismissal of the suit and the restoration. 7. In view of the above, the Learned Counsel for the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant prays th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ditors. However, the Committee, informed the Resolution Applicant, that conditional payment to the operational creditors are not acceptable and accordingly they are requested to remove the conditions for payment of operational creditors or alternatively the Committee will not consider the conditional payment to the operational creditors. However, it was also noted that the Resolution Applicant himself voluntarily removed the conditions for payment to the operational creditors and reduced the payment to Rs. 1 Crore instead of Rs.30 Crores. 11. Besides the above, in the `Minutes of the Meeting of the `Committee of Creditors of `M/s. Bhuwalka Steel Industries Limited dated 18.02.2020 at Page 123 of the `Appeal Paper Book of the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant , it is clearly mentioned as under: ``After the round 8, the Resolution Applicant i.e. Bipin Textile Processing Industries Private Limited, requested the Committee to grant time till the following day i.e., February 19, 2020 for submission of their revised bid. The representatives of Bipin Textile Processing Industries Private Limited was called again for further negotiations but by that time they had l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pp (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 341 of 2022, filed by the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant , lacks `Bonafide and is `not maintainable , since the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant , is `Guilty of Material Misrepresentation and `Suppression of Material Facts and in short, IA No. 771 of 2022 in the instant `Appeal , filed by the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant , is to thwart the implementation of the `Resolution Plan , submitted by the 3rd Respondent. 14. The Learned Counsel for the 3rd Respondent submits that the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant has not set out a single reason as to why it shows not to raise a challenge before the `Adjudicating Authority and further, a `Resolution Applicant has `no Locus to challenge the `Successful Resolution Plan . In short, IA No. 771 of 2022, projected by the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant , is a `Malafide one and a belated endeavour is made on the side of the `Petitioner / Appellant / Resolution Applicant to stall the proceedings and hence the IA No. 771 of 2022 in Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 341 of 2022, is liable to be dismissed, to secure `Interest of Justice . 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
