CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2024) 03 NCLT CK 3075

Pair Hong Kong Co Limited vs Igrphenix Electron Private Limited

National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi · Decided on 4 March 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ramalingam Sudhakar, President · Avinash K. Srivastava, Member (Technical)
CASE NUMBER
(IB)-461(PB)/2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 353 words
1.

On 30.01.2024, we have recorded as follows:

ORDER

1.

Mr. Rohit Chaudhary, Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner appears through VC.

2.

Ms. Reema Khorana, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent appears physically and states that the cost imposed upon the Respondent/CD has been paid and the proof of payment regarding the same is submitted today.

3.

Mr. Rohit Chaudhary, Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner states that the reply to the amended petition is served upon the Petitioner only on 24.01.2024. He further pleads that his client i.e. Petitioner/Operational Creditor is situated at Mainland, China and it is difficult for him to take immediate instructions in the matter. The process of getting instructions is already on and it will take substantial time because of language constraint. He, therefore, pleads for an extended time to file the rejoinder to the reply. He is directed to file a memo to this effect well before the next date of hearing.

4.

Ld. Counsels for both the parties are directed to file the list of dates and events and issue-wise chart before the next date of hearing.

5.

At request of Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner and by consent of both sides, we are inclined to adjourn the matter to 04.03.2024 for a physical hearing.

2.

We had given a long date to the Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner on his request and the reasons are already recorded above.

3.

Mr. Kunal Surhatia, Ld. Proxy Counsel for the Petitioner appears through VC and seeks adjournment stating that the main Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner is not available. The list of dates and events as well as the issue-wise chart is also not filed. It appears that the Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner is not serious in prosecuting the matter.

4.

Ms. Reema Khorana, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent appears physically.

5.

Since the Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner is not serious in prosecuting the matter and seeking dates and there is no seriousness on the part of the Petitioner to pursue this case, the matter stands adjourned to 28.05.2024.

6.

Copy of this order be sent to IBBI.