AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. P. Nagesh, Ld. Sr. Counsel assisted by Ms. Priyata Chakraborty, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant, Mr. Joy Saha, Ld. Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. Arjun Asthana, Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 1, 2, 4-14, Mr. Piyush Beriwal, Ld. Counsel for Respondent No. 15/PNB and Mr. Rohit Dutta, Ld. Counsel for Respondent No. 3.
The present appeal has been preferred against an order dated 05.07.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata in CP/140(KB)2022, CP/46(KB)2023 and CP/ 107(KB)2022 which were pending before the NCLT. The order impugned reflects nothing but from the order it is evident that no final order has been passed on aforesaid Interlocutory Applications and next date was fixed for 25.07.2023. It only recorded short submissions of Ld. Counsel for both the parties. For just decision in the matter it would be appropriate to reproduce the order which is as follows:
“1. Ld. Sr. Counsel/Counsel for the parties present.
An affidavit be filed disclosing Corporate Guarantee of the company and other liability, of the company which is required.
Ld. Counsel Mr. Swatarup Banerjee urges that although there is no liability of the company. Majority of valuable properties situated at Gujrat has already been sold off.
Ld. Sr. Counsel Mr. Joy Saha appearing for the company submits that he will file an affidavit disclosing the liability of the company including corporate guarantee that is required to be liquidated.
Ld. Counsel Mr. Swatarup Banerjee apprehended that the other properties at Gujrat would also be sold off before the next date of hearing. However, we find no reasons for such apprehension at present as no documents to that effect is brought to the fore.
List this matter on 25.07.2023”.
On perusal of the aforesaid order, it is evident that nothing has been indicated in the order on aforesaid Interlocutory Applications and matter is still pending before the NCLT. The grievance of the Appellant is that if no any interim order is passed there is possibility that entire property is sold by the Respondents.
Through the Interlocutory Applications which were filed, an interim relief was sought for and this appeal was preferred against the said impugned order which categorically did not deal with aforesaid applications. This was the reason that on the first day when the matter was taken up and while Mr. P. Nagesh, Ld. Sr. Counsel for the Appellant insisted for interim order we indicated that the relief which is to be granted at final stage cannot be granted at an Interlocutory stage and refused to grant any protection. However, subsequently, the default order was passed by this Tribunal on 31.07.2023 wherein due to the prayer made on behalf of the Respondent/Company for adjournment, it was directed for maintaining status quo in respect of property in question.
We are of the opinion that without interfering with the impugned order the appeal can be disposed of with a request to Ld. NCLT to finally decide the Interlocutory Applications which are pending before it, expeditiously on the next date. It was informed that next date before the NCLT is 29.08.2023. However, considering the apprehension of the Ld. Counsel for the Appellant regarding disposal of the entire property, we propose to request Ld. NCLT to finally pass order on aforesaid Interlocutory Applications by preponing the date for its early disposal.
It goes without saying that this court has not gone into the merit of the case. Ld. NCLT without being influenced with this order may examine the matter expeditiously in accordance with law.
With above observation, the appeal stands disposed of.