J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Dated this the 18th day of November, 2021 The petitioner is before this Court seeking to stay the operation and implementation of Ext.P4 order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Kochi Bench.

2. The petitioner states that he is a promoter and shareholder of M/s.MIR Realtors Private Limited. The Company is engaged in building construction. The Corporate Debtor Company availed a loan of 10 Crores for construction of a tower named 'Haritham' at Karakulam, Thiruvananthapuram offering a security to the tune of ₹35 Crores. Delay occurred in the completion of the project.

3. The 1st respondent-Bank proceeded against the Company filing OA No.173/2020 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam. Simultaneously, Ext.P1 application was also made for insolvency proceedings before the NCLT, Kochi Bench as IBA No.11/KOB/2020. Though the Company opposed the prayers made in the said IBA, the NCLT, Kochi Bench passed Ext.P4 order admitting the application and appointing IRP for initiating further proceedings, apart from imposing a moratorium.

3. It is the contention of the petitioner that he has very strong legal grounds to file appeal against Ext.P4 order. However, due to the heavy flood now being witnessed by the Chennai City where the NCLAT Bench is situated, the petitioner is not in a position to engage a Lawyer and file appeal before the NCLAT, Chennai immediately. The petitioner seeks a breathing time to file appeal and prays that all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 may be kept in abeyance till then.

4. The learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent submits that though the Chennai City is hit by floods, the NCLAT, Chennai is functioning and five cases are listed even today. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits that the writ petition is not maintainable against an order of the NCLT in view of the judgment of this Court in W.P. (C) Nos.8257/2021 and 20685/2021. The writ petition is therefore without merit and is liable to be dismissed, contended the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent. In view of the nature of the relief being granted in this writ petition, notice to the 2nd respondent, who is the IRP, is dispensed with.

6. It is discernible from Ext.P4 that the said order was passed on 16.11.2021. The NCLAT Bench is situated in Chennai. The Chennai City is suffering from unprecedented floods right now. It is the case of the petitioner that cases being listed in NCLAT, Chennai and being heard through virtual mode are cases which were filed earlier. Urgent fresh cases are not filed or listed. In the circumstances, this Court is of the view that the petitioner shall be granted a breathing time to exercise his appellate remedy before the NCLAT, Chennai Bench. Pending the writ petition, if the 2nd respondent is permitted to proceed, it may cause unwarranted damage to the petitioner.

In such circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of staying the implementation of Ext.P4 order passed by the NCLT, Kochi Bench, for a period of 30 days so as to enable the petitioner to avail his statutory remedy. The petitioner may prefer statutory appellate remedy before the NCLAT, Chennai and seek stay of Ext.P4 order in the meanwhile, in accordance with law. The stay being granted herein will be in force only for a period of 30 days from today.