AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
23.04.2024: This appeal is filed against an impugned order dated 19.10.2023 whereby an application CA No. 382/2023 of the Appellant to seek modification of the order dated 11.01.2023 was dismissed. Along with CA No. 382/2023 the Appellant also moved Company Application No. 268/2023 seeking modification of order dated 11.01.2023 and praying the Bench to discharge Respondent No. 5 viz the Ld. Administrator and instead to order and direct the Central Government to conduct an investigation into the affairs of Respondent No. 1 Company by appointing one or more inspectors or SFIO (Serious Fraud Investigation Office) or competent investigation agency with further directions to the applicant to deposit an amount exceeding of Rs. 25,000/-. The application no. 382/2023 was dismissed vide the impugned order as the administrator had continued with his investigation and had rather furnished a preliminary report dated 05.08.2023 by then.
Admittedly partial record was received by the Ld. Administrator by the end of July, 2023 and the investigation was to take 2-3 months, hence the Ld. Administrator sought time till 30.11.2023 for filing of final report. However, direction was given to the Ld. Administrator to place the final report before the next date of hearing. Admittedly, such final report has now been placed on record by the Ld. Administrator, hence the issue qua the reduction of the fee to the Ld. Administrator does not survive.
We have also perused the impugned order. It notes the applicant was to pay the fees as also his other expenses, including travel and stay.
We are also of the view it was the appellant who had invited the appointment of Ld. Administrator and preliminary report as also the final report stood filed, thus the appellant need to clear fee etc. within a month.
Thus, we find no reason to interfere with the reasoning given in the impugned order. The argument that no proper hearing was given to the Ld. Counsel for the Appellant is also belied by the fact that vide the impugned order two other applications viz nos. 226/2023 and 268/2023 were disposed of and against which the Ld. Counsel for the appellant had raised no concern.
The appeal, thus, has no merit and is accordingly dismissed. Pending applications, if any also are disposed of.