AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
03.06.2022: This appeal is directed against the order dated 18.04.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Bench-II) in I.A No. 5502 of 2021 and I.A. No. 5541 of 2021 in Company Petition (IB) No. 330/ND/2021.
In brief, an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short ‘Code’) is filed by the Financial Creditors against the Corporate Debtor before the Adjudicating Authority. So far, the said application has not been admitted, therefore, consequential proceedings have not been initiated.
The Appellant had filed two applications i.e. I.A. No. 5502 of 2021 and I.A. No. 5541 of 2021, in order to get impleaded as a necessary party in the Company Petition (IB) No. 330/ND/2021, and on the same premise, filed I.A. No. 5541 of 2021 which is basically a repetation.
Be that as it may, the application has been rejected by the Adjudicating Authority, inter alia, on the ground that the Applicant is neither a necessary party because it is not a Financial Creditor or Corporate Debtor nor the application filed under Section 7 of the Code has been admitted so far. Therefore, the same has been dismissed on the ground of being pre-mature.
Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant has submitted that the Appellant is the owner of the land measuring 115 Kanal – 6 Marla (14.412 acres) situated in Mewka, Sector 91, Gurgaon, which is being developed as a project in the name and style of ‘The Fern Hill’. The Respondent No. 2 to 127 are the allottees of the project, who have filed the application under Section 7 of the Code before the Adjudicating Authority to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (in short ‘CIRP’).
It is submitted that an MOU was executed between the Appellant and the Developer on the basis of which the Appellant was to take 34.5% of the proceeds from the total sale of the area of the project. It is further submitted that an addendum of MOU was executed on 03.02.2020, as per which, the Appellant was to take 45% of the proceeds from the sale of the area of the project, therefore, it is submitted that in case, the CIRP are initiated then the interest of the present Appellant shall be adversely effected.
We have heard Counsel for the Appellant and perused the record.
The question as to whether the Appellant would fall within the definition of Financial Creditor or Corporate Debtor or even can intervene as an intervenor in the pending petition filed under Section 7 of the Code shall be decided only when it shall be considered by the Adjudicating Authority after the admission of the application filed under Section 7 of the Code, which has been dismissed at this stage only on the ground of being pre-mature.
We have found that there is no error in the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority and therefore, the present Appeal is hereby dismissed. No costs.