Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2017 (8) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (8) TMI 493 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyCorporate Insolvency Resolution Process - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - pending winding up petition - Held that:- Taking into consideration the order passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi as well as the Notification issued by the Central Government and as extracted above it is clear that the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 will govern in relation to the proceedings pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and not the Companies Act, 2013 as contended by the counsel for the applicant. If that be so, no suit or other legal proceeding shall be proceeded with, against the company, except by leave of the Court which is seized of the winding up proceedings. In the present instance no leave has been obtained by the applicant to proceed with present proceedings initiated by the applicant company before this Tribunal and obviously this Tribunal is therefore handicapped in proceeding further in relation to the above company petition. It is to be borne in mind that both winding up proceedings under the erstwhile Companies Act of 1956 as well as the Insolvency Resolution Process is initiated for the benefit of the general body of creditors and is a representative action and not for the recovery of money of the individual creditor for which necessarily claims are required to be submitted to the Official Liquidator or the Interim Resolution Professional as the case may be. In the instant case in view of the matter pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi which has also thought it fit to appoint the Official Liquidator as the Provisional Liquidator of the respondent company, the Interim Resolution Professional, if appointed will again be put on a collusive course with the Official Liquidator even in accepting the claims as may be filed as envisaged under section 21 of IBC. Taking into consideration the above aspects and legal position we are not inclined to accept the submissions put forth by the Counsel for the Applicant and we are constrained to reject the application. Before parting we make it clear that any observations made in this order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merit of controversy as we have refrained from entertaining the application at the initial stage itself. Therefore the right of the applicants before any other forum shall not be prejudiced on account of dismissal of instant application.
|