SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(SC) 840

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.V. NAGARATHNA, UJJAL BHUYAN, JJ.
Eva Agro Feeds Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Punjab National Bank and Another – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 7906 of 2021
Decided On : 06-09-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Parag Maini, Adv. Mr. Varun Lamba, Adv. Mr. Raghav Chadha, Adv. Ms. Nishtha Kumar, AOR Ms. Ira Mahajan, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) Mr. Rajesh Kumar Gautam, AOR Mr. Anant Gautam, Adv. Mr. Samir Mudgil, Adv. Mr. Sumit Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anani Achumi, Adv. Mr. Dinesh Sharma, Adv. Ms. Shivani Sagar, Adv. Mr. Krishnaraj Thaker, Adv. Ms. Pallavi Langar, AOR Mr. Siddhartha Bhatnagar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashish Choudhury, Adv. Mr. Akash Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Rahul Arya, Adv. Mr. Aditya Sidhra, Adv. Mr. Rohit Amit Sthalekar, AOR

Headnote:(A) The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 62 - Cancellation of auction - Appellant's bid was equal to the reserve price, but the auction was canceled by the liquidator without giving reasons - The Tribunal ruled that the cancellation lacks justification and the appellant is declared the successful bidder - The Appellate Tribunal's reversal of the Tribunal's order was found unjustified. (Paras 12, 21, 51)

(B) Liquidator's discretion - The Liquidator has a right to cancel the auction, but this must be justified with valid reasons - The absence of justification renders the cancellation arbitrary - A bidder does not have a vested right to demand acceptance of their bid but must be ensured of clear communication and reasons for cancellation if it occurs. (Paras 21, 34, 39)

Facts of the case:
The appellant was the sole bidder at the E-auction for the corporate debtor’s assets and matched the reserve price. After winning the auction, it was notified of its victory but subsequently received notification of cancellation without justification. This led to the present appeal against the Appellate Tribunal's reversal of the Tribunal's order approving the auction sale. (Paras 3, 21)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the Liquidator’s unilateral decision lacked grounds as to why further auctioning was necessary and emphasized the importance of providing reasons for cancellation. The prior order of the Tribunal, effectively upholding the auction, was restored. (Paras 51)

Issues: The critical issues included the validity of the Liquidator's cancellation of the auction and the authority's obligations in justifying such decisions under the Code. (Paras 21, 51)

Ratio Decidendi: The discretion exercised by the Liquidator, while significant, must still adhere to principles of fairness and transparency; hence, the absence of reasons for cancellation is detrimental. The court reinforced the necessity for all administrative decisions affecting rights to be reasoned and justified. (Paras 34, 39)

Result: Appeal allowed; order of the Appellate Tribunal set aside and the order of the Tribunal restored.

Table of Content
1. overview of case background and procedural history. (Para 2 , 3)
2. court's analysis regarding auction cancellation. (Para 4 , 10 , 16 , 17 , 21 , 22 , 29 , 30 , 43)
3. arguments presented by the appellant and respondents. (Para 5)
4. details of auction process and liquidation. (Para 6)
5. decision to restore the tribunal's order, emphasizing adherence to legal principles. (Para 51)

JUDGMENT :

UJJAL BHUYAN, J.

1. Application (I.A. No. 14220 of 2022) for intervention is allowed.

2. This appeal has been preferred under Section 62 of The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code , 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Code’) against the order dated 30.11.2021 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (briefly ‘the Appellate Tribunal’ hereinafter) allowing the appeal of Punjab National Bank i.e. Respondent No. 1 being Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 757 of 2021. The aforesaid appeal was filed by the Punjab National Bank against the order dated 12.08.2021 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Digitally signed by Bench, Kolkata (briefly the ‘Tribunal’ hereinafter) in I.A. (IB) No. 663/KB/2021 in CP (IB) 440/KB/2018.

3. At the outset, it would be necessary to advert to the relevant facts:

    (i) One Huvepharma Sea (Pune) Private Limited filed an application under Section 9 of the Code against M/s. Amrit Feeds Limited i.e. corporate debtor before the Tribunal. The same was registered as CP(IB) No. 440/KB/2018. The Tribunal passed an order dated 22.10.2019 admitting the application filed under Section 9 of the Code as a result of which corporate insolvency resolution process of the corporate debtor commenced.

    (ii) On 19.02.2021, the Tribunal passed an order for liquidation of the corporate debtor. Respondent No. 2 was appointed as the Liquidator to oversee the corporate insolvency resolution process.

    (iii) Respondent No. 2 by an e-mail dated 07.06.2021 forwarded a sale notice dated 02.06.2021 for sale of the assets of the corporate debtor. 23.06.2021 was the date fixed by Respondent No. 2 for auction sale of the assets of the corporate debtor. It appears that the aforesaid auction sale did not materialize. Thereafter by way of an e-mail dated 29.06.2021, Respondent No. 2 forwarded a similar notice dated 28.06.2021 for auction sale of the assets of the corporate debtor scheduled on 20.07.2021.

    (iv) It is stated that the appellant i.e. Eva Agro Feeds Private Limited was incorporated on 09.07.2021 under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013.

    (v) Appellant submitted its bid dated 16.07.2021 to Respondent No. 2 on 17.07.2021 in respect of the assets of the corporate debtor (in liquidation). The assets put up for auction were lands admeasuring 1,05,250.40 sq. ft. at Plot No. 56, Khata Nos. 27, 26, 29, 36, 36 (Old) and 362/363 (New), Mouza - Deoria, Pargana Bhuli, Tehsil - Chunar, District - Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh with building, plant and machinery and other fixed assets thereon on a lump sum basis as mentioned at serial No. 3 of the sale notice.

    (vi) In terms of the sale notice, appellant paid the earnest money deposit (EMD) of Rs. 1 crore in respect of the subject property. While the last date/time for submission of bid was 20.07.2021 at 14:30 hours, appellant had submitted its bid on 19.07.2021 for a sum of Rs. 10 crores which was equivalent to the reserve price as notified in the bid which ended at 14:30 hours on 20.07.2021.

    (vii) On 20.07.2021, appellant received an E-auction certificate from Respondent No. 2 certifying that it had won the auction for the assets of the corporate debtor put up for auction sale (referred to hereinafter as the ‘subject property’). On 21.07.2021, appellant by way of an e-mail requested Respondent No. 2 to issue allotment letter in respect of the subject property. It is stated that on 21.07.2021 itself appellant received an e-mail of the aforesaid date from Respondent No. 2 informing that Respondent No. 2 had cancelled the E-auction held on 20.07.2021 unde

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top