9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .737/2023 there has occasioned a delay of 14 days in preferring the instant 'Appeal' and the date of 'Impugned Order' was on 20.03.2023 passed by the 'Adjudicating Authority' in IA No.1578(CHE)/2022 in CP(IB)/757/2019 and the reason ascribed for the delay of 14 days in question on behalf of the 'Petitioner'/'Appellant' is that the 'Appellant's Manager' - Operations and Maintenance, was based out of Hyderabad and the Learned Counsel for the 'Appellant' was stationed in Calcutta and for transferring the relevant documents to be filed along with the instant Appeal, it took some time, for the 'Petitioner'/'Appellant's Counsel to finalise the documents in question. As such, the delay that has occasioned for 14 days, is neither wilful nor wanton ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d Counsel for the RP that the claim has since been admitted." and further proceeded to make an observation that 'CIRP' Expenses need to be approved etc. and that the 'Appellant'/'Applicant' cannot have liberty to file claim and also claim the same amount as 'CIRP' cost and dispose of the said Application, by granting liberty, to agitate the 'issue' before the 'appropriate Forum'. The Learned Senior Counsel for the 'Appellant' points out that the 'Impugned Order' is an illegal one and made a reference to the averments made by the 'Appellant' in 'Appeal' [vide Page 22 of the Appeal paper Books] that an application being C.P. No. IBA/757/2019 in IBC under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('Code') read with Rule 4 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t once again claim the very same sum in respect of 'CIRP' cost. As such, it is projected on the side of the 1st Respondent/'Resolution Professional' that the 'Impugned Order' passed by the 'Adjudicating Authority' in IA No.1578(CHE)2022 in C.P. IBA/757 of 2019 is a fair, just, valid one and at this stage of Appeal, it cannot be interfered with by this 'Tribunal' in the interest of justice. This 'Tribunal' has 'Heard' the Learned Counsel for the 'Appellant' and the Learned Counsel for the 1st Respondent/'Resolution Professional' and noticed their contentions. Be that as it may, this 'Tribunal', on a careful consideration and respective contentions advanced on either side and also taking note of the fact that the claim of the 'Appellant'/'P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
