AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
29.11.2022: Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.
This appeal has been filed against the order dated 12.09.2022 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Court-VI by which I.A. No. 4305 of 2022 filed by the Appellant has been rejected. Section 7 application was filed by the Financial Creditor against the Corporate Debtor.
I.A. No. 4305 of 2022 was filed on behalf of the Corporate Debtor where following prayers have been made:
i.Issue summons for production of documents (relating to the bank account of the Corporate Debtor) maintained by Yes Bank and Kotak Mahindra Bank whose details are given in paragraph 1 of the application for the documents specified in paragraph 3 (a) and 3 (b) respectively.
ii.Pass such other order(s) as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.
There was another application IA No. 3037/2022 filed by the Corporate Debtor where following prayers have made in the application:
i.Direct the Applicant to produce the information/ documents enlisted in paragraph 8 of the present Application;
ii.Pass such other order(s) as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.
In I.A. No. 4305 of 2022 the documents which were sought to be produced were detailed in paragraph 7. In I.A. No. 3037 of 2022 documents which were sought to be produced by the Financial Creditor were enumerated.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Adjudicating Authority rejected the application observing that the Adjudicating Authority does not find any merits in issuance of summons for production of documents without entering into the pleas made in the applications.
Learned Counsel for the Appellant further submits that the documents were relevant whose relevance was already indicated in paragraph 7 of the application which were necessary to be supplied/ produced in support of pleadings taken by the Corporate Debtor in its reply.
Learned Counsel for the Respondent refuting the submission of counsel for the appellant contends that appellant has already filed an I.A. No. 3037 of 2022 where almost similar prayers have been made, in which application Adjudicating Authority has already heard the parties and order has been reserved. Hence, the I.A. No. 4305 of 2022 was not required to be entertained.
Learned Counsel for the Respondent has also referred to the certain pleadings which were made by Mr. Randheer Brar who had filed a company petition under Section 241 & 242 of Companies Act, 2013.
In petition under Section 241 & 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, he submits that the relevant financial documents, balance sheets etc. were already referred to in the pleadings, hence, the Adjudicating Authority was not obliged to issue direction as prayed by the appellant.
We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
From the I.A. No. 3037 of 2022 which is on record, it is clear that the documents were sought from the applicant i.e. the Financial Creditor M/s KTC India Pvt. Ltd. are almost the same documents which are now being sought from the Banks to be produced in I.A. No. 4305 of 2022.
Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the obvious reason is that these documents were not provided by the Financial Creditor, hence, the appellant has to file an application seeking direction to the banks to produce the documents.
The submission of the Respondent that prayers in both the applications are same, cannot be accepted. The prayer in the I.A. No. 3037 of 2022 were the prayers where direction was sought to the Financial Creditor to produce the documents and in the I.A. No. 4305 of 2022 the documents have been sought from the banks with whom the account of the Corporate Debtor has been maintained.
The relevancy of the documents has already been elaborately explained by the appellant in the application. The mere fact that the I.A. No. 3037 of 2022 has been heard and reserved has no bearing on the prayers which have been made in I.A. No. 4305 of 2022.
The submission of the Learned Counsel for the Respondent that on the basis of documents filed under Section 241 & 242 being Company Petition No. 06 of 2022, direction need be issued while considering the prayers in the I.A. Nos. 3037, 4305 of 2022 cannot be accepted. The proceedings under Section 241 & 242 which has been initiated in respect of Financial Creditor/Corporate Debtor are entirely different proceedings which cannot be relied for refuting the prayer of the appellant made in I.A. No. 4305 of 2022.
We are thus satisfied that the Adjudicating Authority committed error in rejecting I.A. 4305 of 2022. In result, I.A. No. 4305 of 2022 filed by the appellant is allowed.
Let Yes Bank and Kotak Mahindra Bank may submit the documents before the Adjudicating Authority as detailed in the application itself.
The documents be produced by the Banks before the Adjudicating Authority within period of four weeks from the date copy of this order is produced before the bank.
We make it clear that our order is confined to I.A. No. 4305 of 2022 only.
The appeal is allowed.