Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2017 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 891 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyCorporate insolvency resolution processes - main plea taken by the appellant is that no notice was issued or served by the Adjudicating Authority on the appellant - proof of existence of dispute - Held that:- Though it was reported that no notice has been served at the given address, but the Adjudicating Authority wrongly treated the notice deemed to have been served. It is a settled law that on refusal of the notice by a party, the same can be deemed to have been served, but for insufficient or on wrong address, return of notice cannot be treated to be served. From the aforesaid fact, we find that the impugned order dated 25th July, 2017 was passed by the Adjudicating Authority completely in violation of rules of natural justice. The letter issued on behalf of the appellant – Corporate Debtor dated 1st June, 2016 shows that there is also an ‘existence of dispute’ as is clear from the relevant portions and the preliminary objections. Though it was reported that no notice has been served at the given address, but the Adjudicating Authority wrongly treated the notice deemed to have been served. It is a settled law that on refusal of the notice by a party, the same can be deemed to have been served, but for insufficient or on wrong address, return of notice cannot be treated to be served. From the aforesaid fact, we find that the impugned order dated 25th July, 2017 was passed by the Adjudicating Authority completely in violation of rules of natural justice. For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned order cannot be sustained. The said order is accordingly set aside.
|