The court affirmed that compliance with a Tribunal's order is required in the absence of a stay, emphasizing the need for interim relief to be clearly established before seeking protection during an appeal.

ORDER :

(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.) 

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 11.3.2025 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad whereby the the learned Tribunal has observed that since there is no stay to the order of admission of the CIRP process by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, the suspended management is directed to cooperate and handover the entire information, assets, documents as well as the control of the corporate debtor within a period of three days.

3. The leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed on 11.3.2025 and the copy of the same has been made available on 12.3.2025. The learned counsel submits that the present writ petition has been preferred since the learned National Company Law Appellate Tribunal is not available till 16.3.2025. The learned counsel submits that since the direction of the Tribunal directing the petitioner to handover the entire information, assets, documents as well as control of the corporate debtor within a period of three days ends on 14.3.2025, which is the public holiday, and that thereafter, being Saturday and Sunday, the petitioner is not in a position to challenge the same. He submits that the present writ petition is filed praying for interim protection to approach the learned National Company Law Appellate Tribunal to challenge this particular order. He submits that though the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the learned National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, the respondents therein were seeking time to complete the pleadings and the prayer for interim relief was not heard by the learned National Company Law Appellate Tribunal till date. He, therefore, submits that the petitioner be protected till they are able to file an appeal against the impugned order before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal.

4. Considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. The National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad by order dated 29.11.2024 had directed the IRP to take full charge of the corporate debtor, assets and documents without any delay whatsoever and it was further directed to take police assistance in this regard. The said order has been challenged by the petitioner before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. The appeal is pending adjudication before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The order placed on record dated 25.2.2025 shows that the pleadings are not yet complete and the parties are in the process of completing the pleadings. No stay has been granted by the learned National Company Law Appellate Tribunal till date to the order dated 29.11.2025. The IRP has, thereafter, preferred an application under Section 19(2) of the IBC, 2016 seeking appropriate direction against the petitioner. The said application has been decided by the impugned order, wherein it has been observed that since no stay has been granted by the learned National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, the petitioner is directed to handover the entire information, assets, documents as well as control to the IRP.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to produce any order granting the interim relief in the appeal proceedings. The explanation rendered is that since the parties were seeking time to complete the pleadings in appeal, no interim relief was granted by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal. Since the impugned order only directs the implementation of the order dated 29.11.2024 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad and said order is under challenge in the appeal before the learned National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi and no interim relief being there in favour of the petitioner, the prayer to protect the petitioner till filing of the application to challenge the impugned order cannot be granted.

7. The present writ petition is devoid of merits and is accord