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

2019 Supreme(Kar) 965

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
S. SUJATHA, J.
Bank Of Nova Scotia Ground Floor, Mumbai — Appellant
Versus
OPTO Infrastructure Limited — Respondent
Company Application No. 48 of 2019; Company Petition No. 125 of 2014
Decided on : 18-06-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
K. Arun Kumar, Adv., Sandesh Shetty T, Adv.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the provisions of Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013, and the Companies [Transfer of Pending Proceedings] Rules, 2016, in the context of transferring pending proceedings to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Headnote:

Transfer - Company Petition - Companies Act, 2013, Section 434[1][c]; Companies Act, 1956, Section 433[e]; Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 434[1][c], Companies [Transfer of Pending Proceedings] Rules, 2016, Rule 5 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 and the Companies [Transfer of Pending Proceedings] Rules, 2016, and the provisos inserted by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [Amendment] Ordinance, 2018. The court interpreted the statutory operation of law and the application process for transferring proceedings to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under the mentioned provisions. The court's decision was influenced by the objective of the new Rules, 2016 to provide an opportunity for arrangements, reconstruction, rehabilitation, and other proceedings relating to winding up to be adjudicated by the NCLT under the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant sought transfer of Company Petition No.125/2014 to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under the proviso inserted to Section 434[1][c] of the Companies Act, 2013, as the applicant had chosen to pursue remedies under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was no inhibition for transferring the pending Company Petition to NCLT to enable the applicant to pursue remedies under the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The court deemed it appropriate to transfer the pending Company Petition No.125/2014 to the NCLT to achieve the objectives of the new Rules, 2016.

Issues: The main issue was the transfer of the pending Company Petition to the NCLT in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the provisions of Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013, and the Companies [Transfer of Pending Proceedings] Rules, 2016, as well as the provisos inserted by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [Amendment] Ordinance, 2018. The court considered the objective of the new Rules, 2016 to provide an opportunity for arrangements, reconstruction, rehabilitation, and other proceedings relating to winding up to be adjudicated by the NCLT under the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Final Decision: The court disposed of the application by transferring the Company Petition No.125/2014 to the NCLT to proceed in accordance with the law. The respondent was directed to appear before the NCLT on a specified date without expecting any notice.

JUDGMENT :

S.Sujatha, J.

This company application is filed by the applicant/petitioner seeking transfer of the Company Petition No.125/2014 to the Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru ['NCLT' for short] in terms of the proviso inserted to Section 434[1][c] of the Companies Act, 2013 ['Act 2013' for short].

2. Company Petition No.125/2014 has been filed by the applicant against the respondent company Opto Infrastructure Limited under the provisions of Section 433[e] of the Companies Act, 1956 ['Act 1956' for short] which is currently pending before this Court for hearing admission of the petition.

3. The applicant has chosen and elected to pursue the remedies available under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ['Code' for short] and has filed this application.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent company submits that the applicant has already filed C.P.No.236/2018 before the NCLT invoking the provisions of the Code. Hence, transfer of the present petition would not arise at this stage.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the material on record.

6. Section 434 of the Act, 2013 deals with transfer of certain pending proceedings. Clause [c] of Sub-section [1] of Section 434 and the proviso enforceable with effect from 15.12.2016 reads thus:

    "[c] all proceedings under the Companies Act, 1956, including reconstruction and winding up of companies, pending immediately before such date before any District Court or High Court, shall stand transferred to the Tribunal and the Tribunal may proceed to deal with such proceedings from the state before their transfer:

PROVIDED that only such proceedings relating to the winding up of companies shall be transferred to the Tribunal that are at a stage as may be prescribed by the Central Government."

7. In pursuant to the said provision, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Central Government has issued a notification dated 07.12.2016, framing the Companies [Transfer of Pending Proceedings] Rules, 2016. Rule 5 of the said Rules, 2016 contemplates that:

    "5. Transfer of pending proceedings of Winding up on the ground of Inability to pay debts. [1] All petitions relating to winding up under clause [e] of section 433 of the Act on the ground of inability to pay its debts pending before a High Court, and where the petition has not been served on the respondent as required under rule 26 of the Companies [Court] Rules, 1959 shall be transferred to the Bench of the Tribunal established under sub-section [4] of section 419 of the Act, exercising territorial jurisdiction and such petitions shall be treated as applications under sections 7, 8 or 9 of the Code, as the case may be, and dealt with in accordance with Part II of the Code: Provided that the petitioner shall submit all information, other than information forming part of the records transferred in accordance with Rule 7, required for admission of the petition under sections, 7, 8 or 9 of the Code, as the case may be, including details of the proposed insolvency professional to the Tribunal within sixty days from the date of this notification, failing which the petition shall abate.

[2] All cases where opinion has been forwarded by Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, for winding up of a company to a High Court and where no appeal is pending, the proceedings for winding up initiated under the Act, pursuant to section 20 of the Sick Industrial Companies [Special Provisions] Act, 1985 shall continue to be dealt with by such High Court in accordance with the provisions of the Act."

8. Second proviso to Section 434 [1] [c] inserted by the Code [Second Amendment Act, 2018] with retrospective effect from 06.06.2018 reads thus:

    "PROVIDED FURTHER that any party or parties to any proceedings relating to the winding up of companies pending before any Court immediately before the commencement of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code [Amendment] Ordinance, 2018, may file an application for transfer of such proceedings a

    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