TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 922X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ogress of the other criminal cases and they shall proceed uninfluenced by the impugned order. As regards the second issue taken up by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4 could not have been summoned in their individual capacity by the learned Special Judge when the complaint was filed only against the company through petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4, prima facie, there appears to be merit as Section 74(3) of the I.B.C. does not impose a vicarious liability. List on 13th April 2022. - CRL.M.C. 430/2022 CRL.M.A. 1959/2022 CRL.M.A. 1960/2022 CRL.M.A. 1961/2022 - - - Dated:- 1-2-2022 - HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA For the Petitioner : Mr.Siddharth Aggarwal, Sr.Advocate with Mr.Rohi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Plan in respect to their application which was allowed by the NCLT and even offered to pay a sum of ₹20 Crores, however, the Special Leave Petition sought from the Hon ble Supreme Court was finally dismissed. Thereafter, the respondent No. 2 filed a complaint in terms of Section 74(3) of the I.B.C. and the learned Special Judge vide the impugned order dated 30th October, 2021, summoned not only the company i.e. the petitioner No. 1 but also petitioners No. 2, 3 and 4 who are the Promoters and Directors of petitioner No.1, despite the fact that the respondent No. 2 had filed a complaint seeking summoning of the petitioner No.1 only through petitioner Nos. 2 to 4. 3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners conte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the present case, complaint was filed by the respondent No. 2 only against the petitioner No. 1. However, the learned Special Judge by the impugned order dated 30th October 2021 not only summoned the petitioner No. 1 company but also summoned petitioners No. 2, 3 and 4 without noting any reasons. 5. Notice. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 accepts notice. He states that against the decision of the NCLAT in the case of Committee of Creditors of Amtek Auto Ltd. (supra), the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India filed Civil Appeal Diary No. 32731/2019 wherein, vide order dated 23rd September 2019, the Hon ble Supreme Court stayed the impugned judgment and held that the order dated 23rd September 2019 will not affect the progr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
