AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant and Learned Counsel for the Respondent.
The Appellant has filed this Appeal challenging the Order of the Adjudicating Authority dated 16th January, 2020 by which order the Adjudicating Authority has granted approval to the Liquidator as contemplated under Section 33(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for institution of legal proceedings.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that he is not questioning the approval granted by the Adjudicating Authority but the limited grievance which has been raised by the Appellant is that the Adjudicating Authority has used the word ‘the leave is granted ex post facto’. Submissions of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant is that the said observations are likely to be misinterpreted to the effect that NCLT has also condoned the delay in filing the Application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966.
Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that the Liquidator has filed the Application on 01st April, 2019 under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966 which is pending before the City Civil Court, Bangalore. Learned Counsel for the Respondent further submits that from the day when the Application was filed, it was within time, if the approval is not taken into consideration.
Be that as it may, the Adjudicating Authority while passing the Order under Section 33(5) granting approval was not to consider the maintainability and legality of the Application to be filed or filed by the Liquidator under Section 34 of the Code. It is the City Civil Court which has to take decision regarding all these issues. We are thus of the view that observations in Paragraph 11 of the Impugned Order in so far as the Adjudicating Authority observed ‘the leave is granted ex post fact’ does not determine any issue by the Adjudicating Authority and all contentions and issues are left open to be considered and argued by the parties before the City Civil Court, Bangalore. We are of the view that there is no ground to interfere with the Order impugned.
With these observations and clarifications, we dispose of the Appeal.