Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2019) 07 NCLT CK 0733

Sachin Chemicals vs Rachna Ether India Pvt. Ltd.

National Company Law Tribunal · Decided on 29 July 2019

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajasekhar V.K., Member (Judicial) · Ravikumar Duraisamy, Member (Technical)
CASE NUMBER
CP(IB)-71(MB)/2018

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

3 paragraphs · 269 words

O R D E R

1.

Ld. Counsel for the Corporate Debtor is present. None present for the Operational Creditor.

2.

This Tribunal vide an order dated 29.01.2019 had directed the Petitioner to serve notice on the Corporate Debtor and file affidavit of service, and listed the matter on 15.04.2019. Directions had also been given that in case affidavit of service has not filed within 7 days from that date, the Petition shall be dismissed in default of the Petitioner. On 15.04.2019, owing to paucity of time the case was adjourned to 28.05.2019. On 28.05.2019, there was again no representation on the part of the Operational Creditor. Counsel for the Corporate Debtor was present on that date (28.05.2019) and prayed for time for filing Vakalatnama, Board Resolution and reply. The prayer was allowed with direction that the Vakalatnama, Board Resolution and reply may be filed within seven (7) days with a copy in advance to the opposite party. However, Counsel representing the Corporate Debtor had submitted that he had not received the copy of the Petition. Petitioner was directed to serve a copy of the Petition on the Corporate Debtor within 2 days and the matter was posted to 29.07.2019 for admission. Today, once again there is no representation from the side of the Operational Creditor. Counsel for the Corporate Debtor states that no copy of the Petition has been served upon them till date. Since copy of the Petition has not been served on the Corporate Debtor in-spite of repeated orders and owing to lack of representation before the Tribunal today again, the Petition is dismissed for default.