Tribunals and CommissionsFull Bench(2024) 04 NCLAT CK 3697

T. Raviprasad vs M/s. SCL Infratech Ltd. & Anr.

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, CHENNAI Bench · Decided on 30 April 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
M. Venugopal, Member (Judicial) · Sharad Kumar Sharma, Member (Judicial) · Jatindranath Swain, Member (Technical)
CASE NUMBER
Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.399/2022 (IA Nos.951/2022, 952/2022, 953/2022 & 70/2024)

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

7 paragraphs · 315 words

ORDER

1.

Heard the Learned Counsels appearing for the ‘Appellants’ in main Comp. App. (AT)(CH)(Ins) Nos. 399/2022 & 400/2022.

2.

According to the Appellants, (in both the Appeals), the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amravati, in Commissioner Court Appeal No.7/2018 on 05/05/2023 had set aside the ‘Judgment’ and ‘Decree’ dated 08.12.2017 in O.S.No.83/2017 passed by the ‘Commissioner Court-cum-Court of Principal District Judge’, Kurnool, and resultantly allowed the ‘Appeal’, but without costs.

3.

In view of the fact that the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Amravati had set aside the Judgment and Decree in O.S. No.83/2017 darted 08.12.2017 passed by the Commissioner Court-cum-Court of Principal District Judge, Kurnool on 05.l05.2023 in Commercial Court Appeal No.7/2018, this ‘Tribunal’ at this stage, ‘simpliciter’, is of the considered view that in the Comp. App. (AT)(CH)(Ins) No.399/2022 and 400/2022 on the file of this ‘Tribunal’ that nothing survives for an ‘adjudication’ by this ‘Tribunal’. Viewed in that perspective, the Comp. App. (AT)(CH)(Ins) No.399/2022 and 400/2022 are disposed of as an ‘infructuous one’s. No costs.

4.

Before parting with the case, this ‘Tribunal’ pertinently points out that it is open to the 1st Respondent/Interim Resolution Professional to prefer appropriate Application/Petition before the ‘Adjudicating Authority/National Company Law Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, claiming ‘Legal Costs and Expenses’, and the ‘Fees’ to be paid. If such an ‘Application’, is filed by the ‘Interim Resolution Professional’ before the ‘Adjudicating Authority/Tribunal’, then, the said ‘Application’ shall be dealt with by the ‘Adjudicating Authority/Tribunal’, in the teeth of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and Regulations.

5.

Apart from the above, this ‘Tribunal’ grants permission to the ‘Appellants’ to prefer appropriate ‘Application’ before the ‘Adjudicating Authority/Tribunal’ and to claim appropriate relief for redressal of it/his grievances in respect of the order dated 18.10.2022 in CP(IB) No.56/9/HDB/2021, of course in the manner known to ‘Law’ and in accordance with ‘Law’.

6.

All pending IAs, if any are closed.