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

2018 Supreme(Del) 2010

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
JAYANT NATH, J.
Rajni Anand - Petitioner
Versus
Cosmic Structures Ltd. - Respondent
CO. PET. 152 of 2016
Decided On : 27-09-2018

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Petitioner in person
For the Respondent: Mr. D. Bhattacharya, Mr. Pramod Kalirana, Mr. Pankaj Mehta, Ms. Shweta Soni, Mr. R.K. Mehta, Mr. S.K. Bhatia, Mr. D. Bhattacharya, Mr. Ravi Kumar Metta

The discretionary power of the court to transfer proceedings to NCLT under section 434(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013 and the lack of jurisdiction of the Company Court to stay the proceedings before the NCLT in respect of revival or resolution issue.

Headnote:

Insolvency Code - Transfer of Petition to NCLT - Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 - Summary: The court considered the application for transferring a petition to NCLT under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The court discussed the precedence of the Insolvency Code over the Companies Act, 1956 and the discretionary power of the court to transfer proceedings to NCLT under section 434(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013. The court also referred to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Jotun India Private Limited vs. PSL Limited, 2018 SCC Online Bom 1952, which emphasized that the Company Court shall have no jurisdiction to stay the proceedings before the NCLT in respect of revival or resolution issue. The court dismissed the application, considering the advanced stage of liquidation proceedings and the pending issue before the Supreme Court regarding the initiation of Insolvency Resolution Process when winding up proceedings have been initiated by the High Court.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant sought the transfer of a petition to NCLT under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, citing the precedence of the Insolvency Code over the Companies Act, 1956.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the application, considering the advanced stage of liquidation proceedings and the pending issue before the Supreme Court regarding the initiation of Insolvency Resolution Process when winding up proceedings have been initiated by the High Court.

Issues: The main issue was the transfer of the petition to NCLT under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, and the precedence of the Insolvency Code over the Companies Act, 1956.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the discretionary power of the court to transfer proceedings to NCLT under section 434(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013 and referred to the judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Jotun India Private Limited vs. PSL Limited, 2018 SCC Online Bom 1952, which highlighted the lack of jurisdiction of the Company Court to stay the proceedings before the NCLT in respect of revival or resolution issue.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the application for transfer to NCLT, considering the advanced stage of liquidation proceedings and the pending issue before the Supreme Court regarding the initiation of Insolvency Resolution Process when winding up proceedings have been initiated by the High Court.

JUDGMENT :

Jayant Nath, J.

CA 1025/2018

1. This application is filed by Mr. Chandra Shekhar who is said to have booked a commercial space in one of the projects of the respondent company seeking appropriate orders for transferring of the present petition to NCLT. The applicant states that he has also moved an application under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 before NCLT on which NCLT on 25.5.2018 has passed orders appointing IRP (Interim Resolution Professional). Hence, it is prayed that this petition be transferred to NCLT.

2. The petitioner has filed her reply in court. The same is taken on record and is sent to the Registry for scanning.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Jotun India Private Limited vs. PSL Limited, 2018 SCC Online Bom 1952 to contend that the Insolvency Code would have precedence over the Companies Act, 1956 and that as per the said judgment, where revival/resolution proceedings are initiated, NCLT would have precedence. However, he submits that to avoid any conflict it would be in the interest of justice that this court may in exercise of powers under proviso to section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 transfer the present petition to NCLT.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the OL and for the petitioner have opposed the present application. It has been pointed out that the petition was admitted and the OL was appointed as the Provisional Liquidator way back on 11.1.2017. Thereafter the entire assets of the respondent company have been sealed and taken into custody by the OL and the process of valuation of the assets is going on. In the meantime, on 29.5.2018 noticing that the Ex. Directors were guilty of siphoning off money this Court had directed SFIO to investigate into the affairs of the company. It was also noticed that against most of the Ex. Directors FIRs have been registered and they continue to be in judicial custody.

5. Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 reads as follows:-

“[434. (1) On such date as may be notified by the Central Government in this behalf,-

(a) all matters, proceedings or cases pending before the Board of Company Law Administration (herein in this section referred to as the Company Law Board) constituted under sub-section (1) of section 10E of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), immediately before such date shall stand transferred to the Tribunal and the Tribunal shall dispose of such matters, proceedings or cases in accordance with the provisions of this Act;

(b) any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Company Law Board made before such date may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Company Law Board to him on any question of law arising out of such order:

Provided that the High Court may if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing an appeal within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days; and

(c) all proceedings under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), including proceedings relating to arbitration, compromise, arrangements and 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 stage 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.

Provided further that any party or parties to any proceedings relating 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 and the Court may by order transfer such proceedings to the Tribunal and the proce

















































































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