9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lant / The Regional provident Fund Commissioner and Recovery Officer, EPFO Regional Office, Chennai, the instant 'Comp App (AT)(CH)(Ins) No.334/2022' is preferred against the 'Impugned Order' dated 09.06.2022 passed by the 'Adjudicating Authority' (National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench - I, Chennai) in dismissing the IA(IBC)/748/CHE/2021 in CP/1210/IB/2018, without costs. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the 'Liquidator' had failed to invite the 'Public Announcement' of the 'Liquidation Order', which had eventually led to the delay in preferring the 'Claim', before the 'Liquidator'. However, it is the stand of the 'Appellant' / 'Applicant' that the Respondent / Liquidator has not adhered to the due process o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ' that the 'Delay' is neither 'wilful nor wanton', but, combination of factors 'contributory not attributable' to the Appellant, had not been taken into account by the 'Adjudicating Authority' (National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench - I, Chennai), at the time of passing the 'impugned order' on 09.06.2022 in IA(IBC)/748/CHE/2021 in CP/1210/IB/2018. At this juncture, this 'Tribunal' has perused the 'impugned order' passed by the 'Adjudicating Authority' (National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench - I, Chennai) in IA(IBC)/748/CHE/2021 in CP/1210/IB/2018 and in regard to that, at Paragraph Nos.12 to 14 had observed the following: - 12. "Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gaurav Hargovindbhai Dave - Vs- Asset Reconstruction Compa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that it had calculated the delay from the 'Liquidation Commencement Date' (03.09.2019) and till the 'Date of Submission of 'impugned Form' before the 'Liquidator' on 06.07.2021 and came to the calculation that there was a delay of of 672 days and not 268 days. More importantly, in IA(IBC)/748/CHE/2021 in CP/1210/IB/2018 (Dated 20.07.2021) the Appellant / the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner & Recovery Officer, EPFO Regional Office, Chennai in the 'Relief Portion' at vi (a) had averred as under: - "(a) This Honourable Tribunal may be pleased to condone the delay if any, in filing of claim amount of the Applicant for Rs.3,72,119/- before the Respondent". Ordinarily, it is for the Applicant / Appellant, when there has occasioned a de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
