AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
IA/269/2024
Heard the Learned Counsel for the ‘Petitioner’/‘Appellant’ in IA/269/2024 (Condone Delay Application) in Comp. App. (AT)(CH)(Ins) 97 of 2024.
According to the ‘Petitioner’/‘Appellant’, the instant ‘Appeal’ was filed on 04.03.2024 (Monday) and the last date for preferring an ‘Appeal’ (within 30 days) falls on Sunday, and as per Section 43 of the Limitation Act, 1963, instant ‘Appeal’ came to be filed before the ‘Office of the Registry’ through e-filing on 04.03.2024. As such, there is no delay in preferring the instant Comp. App. (AT)(CH)(Ins) No.97 of 2024.
Accordingly, the I.A. No.269 of 2024 filed on behalf of the ‘Petitioner/Appellant’ on the premise that there has occasioned a delay of one day is closed. No costs.
Comp. App. (AT)(CH)(Ins) No.97 of 2024
Heard the Learned Counsel for the ‘Appellant’ and also Mr. T. Ravichandran, Learned Counsel appearing for the 1st Respondent and Mr. P. Giridharan, Learned Counsel appearing for Respondents 2 and 3.
For better provision and to have a full clarity of the matter, this ‘Tribunal’ extracts the relevant portion of the ‘Impugned Order’ passed by the ‘Adjudicating Authority’/‘Tribunal’ on 02.02.2024 in IA/2431/2023 in IBA/757/2019 on the file of the ‘Adjudicating Authority’/‘Tribunal’ national Company Law Tribunal, Court-1, Chennai had listed as under:
“As regards supply of copy of Resolution Plan to the other Stakeholders/Creditors/Operational Creditors, we find that they are not the participants in the CoC meeting held on various dates as to the consideration and approval of the Resolution Plan. That being the position and in view of the case of (i) “Vijay Kumar Jain Vs. Standard Chartered Bank [2019 SCC Online SC 103’ (ii) “Rupinder Singh Gill Vs. Three C. Universal Developers Pvt. Ltd. through Professional Rakesh Kumar Gupta [Com.App (AT) Ins No.729 of 2021)”, at this stage, we are not inclined to direct the RP to give the copy of the Resolution Plan.”
and ultimately directed the matter to be listed on 12.02.2024 along with IAs through video conferencing.
On behalf of the ‘Appellant, the plea is raised before this ‘Tribunal’ in the instant ‘Appeal’ that the ‘Impugned Order’ passed by the ‘Adjudicating Authority’ is an unnecessary discrimination among the ‘Operational Creditors’ viz. those who participated in the meetings as against those who had not, which is wholly unsustainable, erroneous and further that, in the instant case, the ‘balance of convenience’ is in favour of the ‘Appellant’ for admitting the instant ‘Appeal’.
Ongoing through the ‘Impugned Order’ dated 02.02.2024 in IA/2431/2023 in IBA/757/2019 on the file of the ‘Adjudicating Authority’/‘Tribunal’ national Company Law Tribunal, Court-1, Chennai among other things to the effect that the ‘Appellant’ is that the prospects of the CoC meeting that took place on numerous dates as to the consideration of approval of ‘Resolution Plan’, this ‘Tribunal’ is of the erroneous view that the instant Company Appeal preferred by the ‘Appellant’ is exfacie, not maintainable in the ‘eye of law’.
Looking at from that angle, the instant ‘Appeal’ fails.
In fine, the instant ‘Company Appeal’ (AT)(CH) (Ins) No.97 of 2024 is dismissed. No costs. Connected pending IA No.269 of 2024 is closed.