9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1261X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly stipulates that the Claim has to be submitted on or before the last date mentioned in the Public Announcement. In the instant case, it is an admitted fact that the Claim was submitted with an inordinate delay of 390 days. The contention of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant that this inordinate delay of 390 days is on account of pursuing the Appeal, challenging the Exparte Liquidation Order, is untenable on the ground that the last date for receipt of Claim was 22.10.2020, the Appeal challenging the Liquidation Order, was on 10.11.2020 and moreover, challenging the Liquidation Order by way of an Appeal, specifically in the absence of any `Stay Order , does not prevent, viewed from any angle, the Appellant in preferring a Claim, wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Law Tribunal, Kochi Bench, Kochi, Mr. V.K. Abdul Rahim / the Suspended Managing Director of the Corporate Debtor Company / M/s. Sargam Builders Pvt. Ltd., has preferred this Appeal, under Section 61 (1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as `The Code ). 2. By the Impugned Order dated 21.04.2022, the Adjudicating Authority, has dismissed the Applications, preferred by the Applicant / Appellant herein, observing as follows: 20. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant Shri. Babu Karukapadath and learned counsel for Respondent No.1 Shri. Akhil Suresh and R2 Shri. Mohan Jacob George. We have meticulously perused the case records and various documents annexed with this MA. We have also gone ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out complying with the direction in that order, the applicant has again moved this Tribunal taking some other contentions regarding the non-acceptance of his claim and the interest levied by the Federal Bank. The Liquidator has satisfactorily clarified why his claim was not accepted and the interest charged by the Bank is as per the agreement between the Bank and the Corporate Debtor. It appears to us, that the only intention of the applicant is to delay the proceedings in one way or the other approaching various forums including the Hon ble Supreme Court of India, wherein all his attempts were failed. 22. From the verification of the earlier proceedings of this matter, it is seen that the Suspended Directors are not at all co-operatin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der dated 16.12.2020, had permitted the Appellant to withdraw the Appeal and to prosecute MA No. 207 / KOB / 2020, which was a more comprehensive Petition. Thereafter, the Adjudicating Authority, dismissed MA No. 207 / KOB / 2020 on 20.09.2021, which was challenged by way of an Appeal, by the Appellant in his capacity as a Shareholder in Comp. App (AT) (INS.) No. 264 of 2021. 5. It is submitted by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant that in view of the long pendency of the Proceedings and to avoid any further delay in finalizing the Liquidation Process, in the event of the Appellate Authority under IBC approving the Order of Liquidation, without prejudice to the right of the Appellant, to prosecute the challenge against the Order of Li ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant had filed MA No.207/KOB/2020, seeking to set aside the Liquidation Order and thereafter an Interlocutory Application for Amendment, was filed in this MA No. 207 / KOB / 2020 and was numbered as IA No. 101 / KOB / 2021. 10. The Respondent / Liquidator submits that both the Applications were heard together and dismissed on 17.08.2021, on the ground that the Suspended Directors, are not co-operating in the Corporate Insolvency and Resolution Process and were only looking out to create hurdles in the continuation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. 11. It was further submitted that in the light of the conduct of the Appellant herein, the Adjudicating Authority, had dismissed the said Application with costs of Rs.25,000/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntenable on the ground that the last date for receipt of Claim was 22.10.2020, the Appeal challenging the Liquidation Order, was on 10.11.2020 and moreover, challenging the Liquidation Order by way of an Appeal, specifically in the absence of any `Stay Order , does not prevent, viewed from any angle, the Appellant in preferring a Claim, within the stipulated period of time. 17. It is seen from the record that the Appellant had registered even the Publication of Form B in the Company s Website. An email dated 26.04.2021, sent by the Appellant s requests, the Liquidator, not to Publish Form B in the Website, until the case is disposed of. 18. At this juncture, it is relevant to reproduce the email dated 25.11.2021, addressed by the Liqu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
