9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aper Book - It appears that due to non-service effected on the corporate debtor, the Adjudicating Authority has passed an order for paper publication on 2nd July, 2019. There is no dispute that paper publication was made at Mumbai. In support of submission of the Appellant that registered office of the Corporate Debtor is in the possession of the official assignee since 2013, the Appellant has brought on record the letter issued from Official Assignee s Office High Court, Bombay 30th July, 2021 (Page 77) which indicates that in pursuance of the Order Notice of Motion No. 1 of 2013, order dated 3rd June 2013 official assignee has asked for handing over the documents. From the facts stated, it is clear that registered office at Mumbai was not in the possession and control of the Corporate Debtor and after 2013 correspondence was made by the Corporate Debtor from Jaipur Address which was also responded by the Financial Creditor on 08th May, 2014 - In the record, there is no proof that any step was taken for serving the email nor any affidavit was filed by the Financial Creditor before the Adjudicating Authority that both the modes were adopted for service as directed vide Order dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of this application. By order dated 02.07.2019 it was informed vide affidavit of service, that the notice issued on the corporate Debtor is returned with postal remark left . Further, on 17.09.2019 we have recorded that the Corporate Debtor did not appear before this Tribunal even after service of notice by way of publication of notice in the newspaper. There are no objections filed by the Corporate Debtor even after ample opportunities to do the same. 7. Therefore, it is very clear from the above para 14 of the order of Hon'ble NCLAT that the Hon'ble NCLAT has set aside the CIRP admission order on the ground that the adjudicating authority has committed a procedural error in passing an order without effecting service of notice on the Corporate Debtor. However in the present case on hand, as rightly contended by the Resolution Professional, the notice was served on the Corporate Debtor through substituted service through paper publication in two leading newspapers as per the procedure prescribed by law and therefore this tribunal is of the view that there was no procedural irregularity or illegality committed by this tribunal and this tribunal has no power to set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess at Mumbai and the Appellant never took steps for change of their registered address. It is further submitted that email address in the MCA Website is not functional and emails sent by Financial Creditor have been bounced back although there is no material on record that the email was sent to Corporate Debtor. It is further submitted that Appellant having not challenged the original order dated 24.09.2019 this Appeal is not maintainable. He submits that unless the original order is challenged, no relief can be obtained by the Appellant by challenging order dated 21st June, 2023. Learned Counsel for the Respondent has placed reliance in T.K. David Vs. Kuruppampady Service Cooperative Bank Limited and Ors., (2020) 9 SCC 92. 6. We have considered the submissions of Learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the record. 7. From the facts which has been brought on record it does appear that notice which was sent by the Financial Creditor to the Corporate Debtor pre filing of Section 7 Application and post filing of section 7 application returned with the remark left . Affidavit which was filed on behalf of Financial Creditor also clearly mentioned this fact which has bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich letter is at page 104 which is to the following effect: SASF/KR YST AL/81 May 8, 2014 WITHOUT PREJUDICE To The Managing Director Krystal Stone exports Limited SP-2, IUICO Industrial Area Shivdaspura, Jaipur, India Dear Sir, Sub: OTS Proposal for Settlement of Dues Please refer to your letter dated May 05,20 14 on the above subject. We have carefully examined your proposal towards settlement of dues to SASF. The OTS amount offered by you is only Rs.31 0 lakhs. The proposal offered by you to SASF is not acceptable to SASF. Yours Faithfully (V. Viswanthan) DGM, SASF 10. From the facts stated above, it is clear that registered office at Mumbai was not in the possession and control of the Corporate Debtor and after 2013 correspondence was made by the Corporate Debtor from Jaipur Address which was also responded by the Financial Creditor on 08th May, 2014. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has also submitted that Order dated 2nd July, 2019 also directed to serve through email but no service was effected by email. In the record, there is no proof that any step was taken for serving the email nor any af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
