Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + HC Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2020 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 418 - MADRAS HIGH COURTValidity of order of spcial bench of NCLT - Irregularity in publishing of Cause List in the prescribed manner - Whether non-adherence to Rules 89, 150 to 153 of NCLT Rules, 2016 would vitiate the impugned order? - initiation of CIRP - the petitioner is ready and willing to clear the outstanding dues of the secured creditor / 4th respondent herein within a period of 15 days HELD THAT:- This Court is of the considered view that though Rule 89 of the NCLT Rules have not been complied with by the 2nd respondent, the fact remains that after the pronouncements of the impugned common order on 20.01.2020, certified copy of the said order was furnished to the learned counsel for the petitioner on 27.01.2020 i.e., within 7 days from the date of pronouncement of the order. Section 30 of IBC speaks about Submission of Resolution Plan and Section 31 speaks about Approval of Resolution Plan. Section 61 speaks about Appeals and Appellate Authority and Sub-Section (1) of Section 61 says that “Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained under the Companies Act, 2013, any person aggrieved by the order of the Adjudicating Authority under this Part may prefer an appeal to the NCLAT”. Sub-Section (2) of Section 61 says that the appeal shall be filed within 30 days before the NCLAT and Sub-Section (3) of Section 61 says that an appeal against an order approving a resolution plan under Section 31 may be filed on five grounds - petitioner got the certified copy of the order within 7 days from the date of pronouncement of the common order dated 20.01.2020 i.e., within the timeline contemplated under Section Sub-Section (2) of Section 61 of IBC and as such, it cannot be said that he has been put to serious prejudice on account of non-uploading of the information relating to pronouncement of the orders on 20.01.2020 and non indication of the same in the Cause List. Mandatory nature of NCLT Rules, 2016, more particularly Rules 150 and 153 - HELD THAT:- In the light of the settled legal position that consequences that may arise on account of the non-adherence to the time line/procedure have not been indicated in the said Rules, it can be considered to be only directory. Petition dismissed.
|