2020 (3) TMI 33 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - Insolvency & Bankruptcy

Head Note / Extract:
Maintainability of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - Reversal/recall of the Resolution Plan - Section 32 of IBC - HELD THAT:- The NCLT/Tribunal, in the impugned order held that the said prayer virtually amounts to reversal/recall of the Resolution Plan and the same cause could be taken as a ground for filing an appeal under Section 32 of IBC and not by way of this application which is impermissible in law. As regards exercise of inherent power, the Tribunal has observed that assuming the power of recall is inbuilt in IBC and it can be exercised only in cases where the order is passed without jurisdiction or fraudulently obtained and that is not the case here and the Tribunal, further observed that in the absence of specific conferment of review jurisdiction, it cannot exercise the power to review. The revision petitioner, under the guise of filing a revision, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, wants this Court to issue a positive direction to NCLT, Chennai Bench, to exercise its inherent power in a particular manner. In the considered opinion of the Court, it cannot issue a positive direction to NCLT, Chennai Bench, as to how it should exercise its inherent power. The NCLT/Tribunal also found that in real sense, the revision petitioner wants to recall of the Resolution Plan and the said cause could be taken as a ground for filing an appeal under Section 32 of IBC. Thus, there is an effective alternate remedy provided to the revision petitioner who also claimed to be an Operational Creditor. If this Court starts entertaining revision petitions like this, there is a likelihood of opening of flood gates where the alleged aggrieved person, without resorting to the alternate remedy of appeal, would often approach this Court and that is not the object of IBC - This Court, on an independent appraisal of the entire materials as well as the contents of the impugned order passed by NCLT, Chennai Bench, is of the considered view that there is no error apparent or infirmity in the reasons assigned and finds no merit in this Civil Revision Petition. Petition dismissed.