9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the "Code") by M/s Sony Pictures Networks Ltd. by order dated 27.11.2018. The Appellant Srigopal Choudhary was confirmed as Resolution Professional ("RP") by order dated 01.02.2019. (ii) On 20.08.2019, the Committee of Creditors ("CoC") in 14th Meeting approved the Resolution Plan of M/s SREI Multiple Asset Investment Trust Vision India Fund by a voting percentage of 69.21%. The RP filed IA No.576 of 2019 under Section 31, sub-section (1) seeking approval of the Resolution Plan. (iii) SREI Equipment Finance Limited (Respondent No.1 herein) is the Financial Creditor of the Corporate Debtor having 53.41% vote share. On 10.08.2021, Respondent No.1 sent an email to the RP to convene a Meeting of the CoC. Another Financial Creditor of the Corporate Debtor - Karnataka Bank (having 16.76% vote share) also wrote on 10.08.2021 to the RP to convene a Meeting of the CoC. The RP on 11.08.2021 communicated that Code, do not in any manner provide for or for that matter contemplate any CoC Meeting in respect of the Corporate Debtor, till the approval of the Resolution Plan by the Adjudicating Authority. On 18.10.2021, Respondent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 07.06.2023. It is submitted that the Appellant came to know about the order dated 25.04.2021 regarding filing of reply by the Appellant and the reply was being prepared, but before it could be filed, the order was passed. It is submitted that the Adjudicating Authority committed error in rejecting IA No.3216 of 2023. 5. The learned Counsel appearing for Respondent refuting the submissions of learned Counsel for the Appellant contends that the Application filed by the Appellant under Rule 49 of the NCLT Rules was not maintainable and only remedy available to the Appellant was to file an Appeal against the order dated 07.06.2023. The order dated 07.06.2023 removing the Appellant as RP has become final. The Appellant having not filed the Appeal against the said order, he cannot be allowed to challenge the order dated 07.06.2023. It is submitted that no sufficient cause was made out in the Application - IA No.3216 of 2023. The Appellant was duly served with the notice of the Application and was well aware of the order dated 25.04.2023. The Appellant having appeared on 12.05.2023, the mentioning of the date 03.05.2023 in the Notice becomes insignificant. The present Appeal is not main ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rule 49 of the NCLT Rules, 2016. Rule 49 delas with 'Ex-parte Hearing and disposal', which is as follows: "49. Ex-parte Hearing and disposal.- (1) Where on the date fixed for hearing the petition or application or on any other date to which such hearing may be adjourned, the applicant appears and the respondent does not appear when the petition or the application is called for hearing, the Tribunal may adjourn the hearing or hear and decide the petition or the application ex-parte. (2) Where a petition or an application has been heard exparte against a respondent or respondents, such respondent or respondents may apply to the Tribunal for an order to set it aside and if such respondent or respondents satisfies the Tribunal that the notice was not duly served, or that he or they were prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing (when the petition or the application was called) for hearing, the Tribunal may make an order setting aside the ex-parte hearing as against him or them upon such terms as it thinks fit. Provided that where the ex-parte hearing of the petition or application is of such nature that it cannot be set aside as against one respondent only, it may be se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... intainable and even this Appeal also is not maintainable against the order dated 12.12.2023. 13. The Adjudicating Authority on Application filed by Respondent No.1 being IA No.2121 of 2023 issued notice on 25.04.2023 and granted 10 days' time to file reply. The order dated 25.04.2023 is as follows: "New IA-2121/2023:- Heard Mr. Rajeev Chaudhary, Ld. Counsel appearing for the Applicant namely (SREI Equipment Finance Limited). Issue notice to the Respondents. The Applicant shall serve a copy of the application to the Ld. Counsel appearing for the Resolution Professional and file proof of service and affidavit of service within one week. The Resolution Professional is directed to file reply affidavit within ten days. List the matter on 12.05.2023." 14. The notice which is sent to the Appellant mentions about the order passed on 25.04.2023. According to the Appellant the said notice wrongly mentions that the case is listed on 03.05.2023, whereas the case was not listed on 03.05.2023. The Appellant has annexed the copy of the cause list, which indicates that case was not listed on 03.05.2023. The Appellant's case is that on 12.05.2023, which was the date as fixed by ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ploaded/available on the website of this Hon'ble NCLT on/and around 27.05.2023 i.e., after 1 month after passing of the order of this Hon'ble Tribunal. Upon perusal of the order dated 25.04.2023, the Applicant noted that this Hon'ble Tribunal had directed the Applicant to file reply in the said application filed by Respondent. The Applicant being a Respondent in the said application filed by Respondent being then apprised of the said directions of this Hon'ble Tribunal immediately commenced preparation of the reply to be filed in the said application filed by Respondent. It is submitted that the Applicant was unable to file the reply in time as the Applicant is placed out of Kolkata and there was a delay due to logistical reasons." 18. The fact that reply could not be filed even before 08.06.2023, indicates that the Appellant was not in compliance of the order dated 25.04.2023 and the Appellant filed the Application on next day, i.e., 08.06.2023, taking the pretext that his Counsel has wrongly noted the date as 08.06.2023. The Adjudicating Authority has not accepted the cause shown by the Appellant for non-appearance on 07.06.2023. The observation of the Adjudicating Authority th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
