AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
25.09.2023: These two appeals have been filed against the same order passed by the Adjudicating Authority dated 24.07.2023 by which the Adjudicating Authority has rejected I.A./2889/ND/2023 filed by the Resolution Professional for extension of 60 days’ time from the date of expiry of CIRP i.e. from 16.05.2023 for allowing the CoC to consider and vote upon approval of Resolution Plan. The Adjudicating Authority has given two grounds to reject the application. Firstly, the Adjudicating Authority has observed that the extension of time till 15.05.2023 was given by the Appellate Tribunal by order of this Tribunal dated 14.02.2023 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1125 of 2022, hence, it is only the Appellate Tribunal which can extend the time. It was further observed that against the order of this Tribunal in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1125 of 2022, an appeal was filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court being Civil Appeal No. 1926 of 2023 which was dismissed as withdrawn on 24.03.2023 and liberty was granted for applying for extension of time but said liberty was granted to Govind Prasad Todi and Siddhartha Todi who were Appellant before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, hence, the Resolution Professional could not have filed application.
We have heard learned counsel for the Appellant as well as learned counsel for the Respondent – Liquidator. It is submitted by learned counsel for the Appellant that the Resolution Professional has filed application on the instruction of the CoC, which decided to seek extension since two plans were already received which have to be voted upon.
This Tribunal by its order passed in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1125 of 2022 has extended the CIRP for a period of 90 days which order was challenged by Govind Prasad Todi and Siddhartha Todi before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 1926 of 2023, where the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed following order on 24.03.2023:
“ORDER
After arguing the matter for some time, the learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants seeks leave to withdraw this appeal with a liberty that if occasion arises, he may be permitted to apply for extension of time. With the aforesaid liberty, the civil appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.”
The liberty was granted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to apply for extension of time. Extension of time in the CIRP has to be applied by the Resolution Professional who is the official conducting the CIRP and further when CoC has instructed the Resolution Professional to seek extension of 60 days, we are of the view the application could not have been rejected only on the ground that Govind Prasad Todi and Siddhartha Todi who were granted liberty, who have not filed the application. The liberty was granted to Govind Prasad Todi and Siddhartha Todi to also file application for extension but the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court does not preclude the Resolution Professional to make application for extension of time.
In the facts of the present case, when in the CIRP plans have already been received which have to be voted upon, we are of the view that ends of justice shall be served in extending the period of CIRP for 60 days as prayed for in I.A. No. 2889 of 2023. In result, we allow both the Appeals. Set aside order dated 24.07.2023 and allow I.A. No. 2889 of 2023 and grant extension of further 60 days period from today.