Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2020 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 638 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHIInitiation of CIRP proceedings - order of NCLT - also alleged that the ‘Corporate Debtor’ was never issued with a notice by the Tribunal, in the application filed by the First Respondent / ‘Financial Creditor’ - HELD THAT:- It is to be pointed out the question of whether there is a ‘debt’ and ‘default’ can be looked into only if a ‘Corporate Debtor’ disputes the debt or comes out with a plea that there is no default, though there is a ‘debt’. Besides this, in (Blacks’ Law Dictionary 9th edition) the words ‘time value’ are defined to mean the price associated with the length of time that an ‘investor’ must wait and till an investment matures or the related income is earned. In the instance case, the Appellant has come out with a plea that the ‘Corporate Debtor’ was never issued with notice by the ‘Adjudicating Authority’ (Tribunal) and since the ‘serving’ of advance copy of the application to the ‘Corporate Debtor’ cannot be construed / deemed to be service of notice in the eye of Law, this Tribunal holds that the ‘Adjudicating Authority’ / Tribunal while reserving orders in C.P. No. IB-3228 (ND)/2019 had committed error of jurisdiction in reserving orders and passed the impugned judgement without issuing notice to the ‘Corporate Debtor’ which is clearly unsustainable in the eye of Law. When a plea is taken before this Tribunal that there was no ‘Debt’ extended by the ‘Financial Creditor’ to the ‘Corporate Debtor’ and added further there was no privity of contract between the ‘Financial Creditor’ and ‘Corporate Debtor’, this Tribunal is of the earnest opinion that in the impugned order there was no finding rendered by the ‘Adjudicating Authority’ as to how a third party payment became a ‘Financial Debt’ or how a ‘Financial Creditor’ had become a ‘Financial Creditor’, in the absence of any ‘Financial Debt’ - It cannot be brushed aside that the third party ‘Taj Consultancy’ was not a party to the proceeding before the ‘Adjudicating Authority’ and further that Mr. Rajeev Aggarwal, according to the Appellant is neither a Director or a Shareholder of the ‘Corporate Debtor’ and the impugned order is conspicuously silent about this vital aspect. On this score also the impugned order of the ‘Adjudicating Authority’ suffers from legal infirmity. Matter remanded to the ‘Adjudicating Authority’ [National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench-VI, New Delhi] for fresh consideration and appreciation - appeal allowed by way of remand.
|