2024:CGHC:43900 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP227 No. 15 of 2022

1 - KSK Mahanadi Power Company Limited Through Its Authorized Signatory, Registered OfÏce At 8-2-298/82/A/431/A, Road No. 22, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad 500033 and having its works Station Village -Nariyara, Tehsil Akaltara, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.

... Petitioners versus

1 - Bijulmati Gond , W/o Late Panchuram, Age 48 Years, R/o Village Nariyara, Tehsil Akaltara, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh.

2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Janjgir ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Saurabh Sahu, Advocate For Respondent : None Digitally signed No.1 by SHYNA AJAY Date: 2024.11.14 For State Mr. SK Puria, Panel Lawyer SB.: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari

O rder on Board

12/11/2024

1. This petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 7.8.2021 passed by the Civil Judge Class-I, , Akaltara, District Janjgir-Champa in Civil Suit No.13A/2015, whereby, the trial Court notwithstanding the prohibitory order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal at Hyderabad (NCLT) under Sections 13 and 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short “the Code”), dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Section 151 of the CPC seeking continuation of stay in a proceeding in view of the moratorium imposed under Section 14 of the Code and the order passed by the NCLT on 3.10.2019.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that respondent No.1 has filed a Civil Suit for declaration of title, permanent injunction in respect of the suit property bearing Khasra No.1247/58 admeasuring 0.25 acre. In the said suit, the Petitioner-Company has filed the written statement and disputed the fact that the plaintiff/respondent No.1 is the mother of Mr. Jaipal Singh. During pendency of such suit, one of the Financial Creditor - Power Finance Corporation Limited filed an application before the NCLT under Section 7 of the Code bearing CP(IB) No.492/07/HDB/2019 for initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process. In the said case, NCLT by the order dated 3.10.2019 passed an order in terms of Sections 13 and 14 of the Code and the said order is still in force. He submits that the trial Court has wrongly applied the ratio laid down in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited and Another Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2018) 16 SCC 299, which is also overruled in the matter of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2024) 6 SCC 267, in the present matter. Hence, in view of the above, the impugned order is not sustainable. Lastly, he submits that this petition may be disposed of directing the concerned trial Court to decide the subject application filed under Section 151 of the CPC afresh.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed with the petition.

4. It is evident that the trial Court has passed the impugned order in view of the judgment laid down in the matter of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited (supra), wherein, a direction was given that the trial courts may, on expiry of six months, resume the proceedings without waiting for any other intimation unless express order extending stay is produced.

5. In High Court Bar Association, Allahabad (supra), it was observed that direction issued in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited (supra), is directory in nature rather than mandatory. The following was held in para 53 to 57 :

“53. It is well recognised that no one can be made to su on account of any mistake or fault of the Court which means that even delay on part of the Court in deciding the proceedings or any application therein would not be detrimental to any of the parties to the litigation much less to the party in whose favour an interim stay order is passed.

54. It is settled in law that grant of interim stay order ought to be ordinarily by a speaking order and th