AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 245/2025, has been preferred by the Appellant, being aggrieved against the impugned order of 07.05.2025 in IA(IBC) No.835/2025, as preferred in CP(IB)No. 320/7/HDB/2022. By virtue of the said impugned order, the Learned Adjudicating Authority has granted an extension of 30 days for the purposes of implementation of the plan, that is, for payment of the balance amount to be paid as determined under the Resolution plan.
When the appeal was preferred, there operated no interim order, and subsequent thereto much water has flown thereafter owing to the certain other proceedings, which have taken place. Ld. Senior Counsel for the Appellant, Ms. Madhavi Diwan, submits that, in fact, the subsequent proceedings, which have taken place are prejudicial to her interest and, as such these issues too should be clubbed together to be decided in the instant appeal.
We are apprehensive to accept this argument of the Ld. Senior Counsel for the Appellant because of the fact that this company appeal is exclusively confined to the aspect of grant of an extension of 30 days, for the purposes implementation of the Resolution Plan. Thus, the issue for adjudication would be confined to consideration with regards to the propriety of the extension being granted. Since the said time period of extension has already lapsed and the extension as granted has already been availed of for the purpose of implementation of the Resolution Plan, this ‘company appeal’ would stand ‘closed’, but with the clarification that all issues with regards to the merit and the effect of the implementation of the Resolution Plan, will be exclusively an issue left open for the Appellant to be agitated at an appropriate forum available to her in accordance with law.