Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + HC Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2017 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 1523 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURTDenial of natural justice - Insolvency procedure - no opportunity to file a written objection or a written document disputing or dealing with the claim put forward by the petitioner in the proceedings before the NCLT - HELD THAT:- The respondent no.3 had applied under Section 9 of the Code of 2016. Sree Metaliks Limited (2017 (4) TMI 1248 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT) is of the view that NCLT has adhere with the principles of natural justice. The respondents before the NCLT is entitled to one opportunity of hearing. Hearing would include an opportunity to file a written objection to the application as a party is heard on the basis of the pleadings before the adjudicating authority. NCLT ought to have granted the petitioner one opportunity to file written objection. Such opportunity was not extended to the petitioner before me. There is an apparent breach of the principles of natural justice in the conduct of the proceeding by the NCLT. There can be an occasion when the NCLT may be required to admit the petition and pass an ex-parte ad-interim order. It can do so for the reasons recorded in writing. NCLT may deny a respondent the opportunity to file a written objection. Again the NCLT has given reasons for the same. Denial of such opportunity should be limited to rare cases. The order passed by the NCLT is appealable. The existence of statutory alternative remedy is not an absolute bar to the maintainability of writ petition, if the writ petitioner is able to demonstrate and substantiate that, there is a breach of fundamental right or that there is breach of principles of natural justice or that the authority has acted without jurisdiction. In the present case, it appears that the NCLT has acted in breach of the principles of natural justice. The impugned order does not contain any reason as to why the petitioner was not allowed an opportunity to file its written objection. In such circumstances, it would be appropriate to set aside the impugned order dated July 31, 2017. As the petitioner submits that, his client will file the written objection to the application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 within seven days from date. In such circumstances, the petitioner is allowed to do so.
|