9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 1207X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gainst 'Kindle Developers Pvt. Ltd.' (Corporate Debtor) being (IB) 470(ND)/2017. Notice was issued by the Adjudicating Authority on 20.11.2017. The Adjudicating Authority on 15.01.2018 recorded that Respondents have been duly served but no one is present on behalf of the Respondents. Respondents were ex-parte proceeded. On 30.01.2018, the arguments were heard in the Application. On 09.03.2018, Application was listed for pronouncement of the order before the Adjudicating Authority and on 09.03.2018, order was pronounced by the Adjudicating Authority admitting the Application under Section 7. One Mr. Yogesh Kumar Tyagi was appointed as Interim Resolution Professional. Interim Resolution Professional made public announcement on 03.08.2018. The Appellant before us filed his claim in Form-B on 09.07.2019. I.A No. 1442 of 2020 was filed by the Appellant praying for direction to the Resolution Professional to verify, entertain and accept the claim of the Appellant which Application was disposed off by the Adjudicating Authority on 26.07.2021 directing the Resolution Professional to consider the claim of the Applicant (Appellant) on merits. In the meantime, by an order passed on 30.07.2018 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its order dated 30.07.2018 passed in the proceedings. It is submitted that the Board of Directors shall not be deemed to be suspended on 09.03.2018 and were entitled to function till 22.06.2018 which is the date on which the order of the Adjudicating Authority was uploaded on the website. 3. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent submits that the order dated 09.03.2018 was pronounced by the Adjudicating Authority which was duly shown in the cause list of the said date. Arguments were heard earlier on 30.01.2018. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process proceedings shall be commenced on 09.03.2018 and it cannot be said to have commenced on 22.06.2018. The mere fact that earlier Interim Resolution Professional in his public announcement has mentioned the date of commencement as 22.06.2018 shall not change the legal position. It is submitted that the Appellant had filed his claim as Operational Creditor in Form-B and the endeavour to change the claim from Operational Creditor to Financial Creditor was wholly unjustified. Section 7 proceedings having commenced from 09.03.2018, there was no occasion for the Corporate Debtor to enter into any Memorandum of Understanding with t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel for the Petitioner prays for a adjournment on grounds that the arguing counsel is unwell. At his request adjourned to 30th January, 2018." 8. Further, the arguments were heard in Application under Section 7 on 30.01.2018 when the Adjudicating Authority directed the matter to come up for clarification/ orders. The cause list of the Court has been brought on record along with the Reply which indicates that it was listed for 'pronouncement of order' on 09.03.2018 as Item No.1. The order was pronounced on that date. The order dated 09.03.2018 which has been brought on the record along with the Reply of the Respondent, on the top of the order mentioned "order delivered on 09.03.2018". 9. Rule 150 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 provides for 'pronouncement of order'. Rule 150 is as follows:- "150. Pronouncement of Order.- (1) The Tribunal, after hearing the applicant and respondent, shall make and pronounce an order either at once or, as soon as thereafter as may be practicable but not later than thirty days from the final hearing. (2) Every order of the Tribunal shall be in writing and shall be signed and dated by the President or Member or Members constitut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ic in general. If we accept the submission of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, there will be too much uncertainty and vagueness. There shall be different dates. Then the date of the operation of the order shall depend on knowledge of Interim Resolution Professional and public in general which is not intent and purpose of the 'I&B Code'. Any such interpretation will give ample rope to Corporate Debtor to defy the order of admission passed by the Adjudicating Authority to suit its purpose and object. When the statute specifically provides for declaration of Moratorium after admission of the Application, the said declaration cannot remain suspended and inoperative for any reason. When a Tribunal or Court pronounce an order in accordance with Rule, the legal consequences from the order flow from pronouncement of judgment and its operation shall not be suspended on specious submission as was contended before us that since order was uploaded on 22.06.2018, it shall not become operative. 12. In the present case, we have already noticed that the Application under Section 7 was filed in the year 2017. Notices were served on the Corporate Debtor as recorded by the Court on 15.01.2018. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
