Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (7) TMI 2016

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... u/s 9 to its original file, there are no illegality in the impugned order. In so far hearing of the Appellant Amrit Feeds Limited (Corporate Debtor) is concerned, the petition having restored, the Appellant Amrit Feeds Limited (Corporate Debtor) will be given notice by the Adjudicating Authority before passing any order in the application u/s 9 preferred by S.S. Enterprises(Operational Creditor). There are no reason to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. - HON'BLE JUDGES S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA, J. (CHAIRPERSON), A.I.S. CHEEMA, J. (MEMBER (J)) AND KANTHI NARAHARI, MEMBER (T) For the Appellant : Diwakar Maheshwari, Vivek Jhunjhunwala and Partiksha Mishra, Advocates For the Respondent : None ORDER 1. The A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 39; ('Corporate Debtor') pursuant to order passed in CP (IB) No. 333/KB/2018 was challenged by promoter of 'Amrit Feeds Limited' ('Corporate Debtor') before this Appellate Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 102/2019. In the said case, the parties settled the matter and this Appellate Tribunal by order dated 11th February, 2019, set aside the order of initiation of 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' against 'Amrit Feeds Limited' ('Corporate Debtor'). 6. In the said Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 102/2019, it was not brought to the notice of this Appellate Tribunal that the Adjudicating Authority by order dated 25th January, 2019 had not entertained the application u/s. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ational Company Law Tribunal) ('NCLT'), Kolkata Bench has no jurisdiction to recall its earlier order having no power of review or to recall. 9. Further according to him, the Respondent should have issued a fresh Demand Notice u/s. 8(1) and only thereafter should have preferred a fresh application u/s. 9 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('I B' Code). 10. It is further submitted that before Restoration of the application and passing of order in MA No. 302/KB/19 the 'Corporate Debtor', should have been noticed and heard. 11. However, such submissions cannot be accepted for the following reasons:- (i) The 'S.S. Enterprises' having already issued Demand notice u/s. 8(1) and thereafter as the 'Corporate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates