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

2023 Supreme(Del) 6029

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Limited - Appellant
Versus
Sukhmani Financial Advisors Pvt. Ltd. - Respondent
CO.PET. 229 of 2016 and CO.APPL. 967 of 2016, 968 of 2016 with CO.PET. 231 of 2016 and CO.APPL. 975 of 2016, 976 of 2016, CO.PET. 232 of 2016 and CO.Appls. 978 of 2016, 979 of 2016 CO.PET. 233 of 2016 and CO.APPL. 981 of 2016, 982 of 2016 with CO.PET. 235 of 2016 and CO.APPL. 987 of 2016, CO.APPL. 988 of 2016
Decided On : 20-09-2023

Advocates appeared:
None, for the Petitioner.
None, for the Respondent.

IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that in cases where the winding up process is not at an advanced stage, the matter is to be transferred to the NCLT in accordance with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Headnote:

Winding Up - Corporate Guarantees - Companies Act, 1956, Section 434 - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Notification dated 7th December, 2016 - Co. Pet 446/2013 - Transfer of pending cases to NCLT

Fact of the Case:

The petitions seek winding up of the Respondent Companies due to disputes related to corporate guarantees issued in lieu of credit facilities. The debt of ICICI Bank Ltd. was assigned to Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. The issue of transfer of winding up petitions to the NCLT was raised due to the enactment of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that in cases where the petition is not at an advanced stage, the matter is to be transferred to the NCLT. As the winding up process was not at an advanced stage and no steps had been taken, the petitions were directed to be transferred to the NCLT. The interim order granted by the Court dated 19th April 2016 was to continue to operate till the matters are taken up and considered by the NCLT.

Issues: The main issue was the transfer of winding up petitions to the NCLT in light of the enactment of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on the decision in Co. Pet 446/2013 and highlighted that in cases where the winding up process is not at an advanced stage, the matter is to be transferred to the NCLT. It emphasized that the winding up proceedings could consume considerable time and, accordingly, the petitions were transferred to the NCLT.

Final Decision: The petitions, along with all pending applications, were disposed of with a direction to transfer them to the NCLT. The interim order granted by the Court dated 19th April 2016 was to continue to operate till the matters are taken up and considered by the NCLT.

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. None appears for either of the parties.

3. These petitions seek winding up of the Respondent Companies. The dispute relates to certain corporate guarantees dated 17th June, 2013 issued by the Respondents in lieu of credit facilities availed of by M/s. Tulip Telecom Ltd. The details of the petitions against whom winding up is sought are as under:

Writ PetitionRespondent CompanyCO.PET. 229/2016Sukhmani Financial Advisors Pvt. Ltd.CO.PET. 231/2016Sharad Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.CO.PET. 232/2016Firepro Wireless and Technologies Pvt. Ltd.CO.PET. 233/2016Iron Traders Pvt. Ltd.CO.PET. 235/2016Cedar Infonet Pvt. Ltd.

4. Notice was issued in this petition initially in 2016 and an interim order was passed on 19th April 2016 to the following effect:

    "Till the next date of hearing, the Respondent company shall not dispose off or alienate or encumber either directly or indirectly, or otherwise part with possession of any assets of the company to the tune of Rs. 680 crores, except in the ordinary course of business and for the payment of salaries and statutory dues."

Thereafter pleadings have been completed in the matters. The petitions are yet to be heard.

5. The debt of the ICICI Bank Ltd. came to be been assigned to Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd vide assignment deed dated 29th June, 2016.

6. In the present case, the substitution of ICICI Ltd to Edelweiss was allowed on 15th December 2017. On 13th March 2023, the Petitioner prayed that the matters deserve to be transferred to NCLT. On the said date an adjournment was sought on behalf of the Respondents.

7. Today, none appears for the parties.

8. During the pendency of these petitions, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 has been enacted, and pending proceedings under Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 are to be transferred to the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). The said section reads as under:

    "434. Transfer of certain pending proceedings

    (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 only such proceedings relating to cases other than winding-up, for which orders for allowing or otherwise of the proceedings are not reserved by the High Courts shall be transferred to the Tribunal

    [Provided also that]-

    (i) all proceedings under the Companies Act, 1956 other than the cases relating to winding up of companies that are reserved for orders for allowing or

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