NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH (COURT-I), CHANDIGARH APPLICATION UNDER RULE 11 AND RULE 48 OF THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL RULES, 2016 [NCLT RULES, 2016] FOR RESTORING RST.A. (IBC)/5/(CH)/2024 DISMISSED VIDE ORDER DATED 23.10.2024 IN THE MATTER OF:

M/s TRUES STEELS PVT. LTD Vill. Kuranwala, Barwala Road Derabassi, Mohali Punjab-140507 Email: sale@tsplchd.com … Applicant Versus M/s INOX WIND LTD Plot No.1, Khasra No 264-267, Industrial Area, village Basal, District Una, Himachal pradesh-174303 Email: enquiry@inoxwind.com …Respondent Order delivered on: 10.O2.2026 Coram:HON’BLE MR. KHETRABASI BISWAL, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)

HON’BLE MR. SHISHIR AGARWAL, MEMBER(TECHNICAL)

Present:

For the Applicant : Ms. Ekakshra Mahajan, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Rajat Khanna, Advocate Per: MR. KHETRABASI BISWAL, MEMBER(JUDICIAL)

MR. SHISHIR AGARWAL, MEMBER(TECHNICAL)

ORDER This Restoration Application (hereinafter referred to as the “Application”) has been filed under Rule 11 read with Rule 48 of National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “NCLT Rules”) by the Applicant’s Counsel (hereinafter referred to as the “Applicant”) for restoring the RST.A.(IBC)/5/(CH)/2024 dismissed, vide, Order dated

23.10.2024 praying to:

(a) Allow this Application and thereby restore Rst. A. (IBC)/5/(CH)/2024 filed in CP(IB) No. 114/CHD/HP/2019, to be heard on merits, in the interest of justice and equity.

(b) Pass any other or further Orders as this Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The Brief facts, as stated by the Applicant, in the Application, are as below:

(a) It is stated that the Applicant’s Counsel was unable to appear in the RST.A. (IBC)/5/(CH)/2024 which was listed on 23.10.2024 before the Tribunal owing to extenuating circumstances.

(b) It is stated that the Applicant’s Counsel has a three-month-old baby, and on the day of the hearing, the counsel was required to tend to the baby due to pressing and unavoidable circumstances. Due to the aforementioned extenuating situation, when the matter was called out, the Ld Counsel was unable to attend and represent the case.

(c) It is stated by the Ld Counsel that she deeply regrets the inconvenience caused and assures the Honourable Court of their sincere commitment to the timely and diligent conduct of future proceedings.

(d) The Applicant submits that non-prosecution was neither wilful nor wanton and the Applicant states that the Operational Creditor shall be put to irreparable loss and hardship if RST.A.(IBC)/5/(CH)/2024 is not restored.

(e) The Applicant submits that no such or similar application has been filed by the present Applicant earlier before this Hon’ble Tribunal or before any other forum of India.

3. The Reply given by the Respondents, are as follows:

a) Non-Applicant/Corporate Debtor denies all the claims, averments, and contentions raised by the Applicant, and nothing therein shall be deemed admitted unless specifically admitted herein. It is submitted that the Application is false, frivolous, misconceived, and an abuse of the process of law. The present Application is not maintainable in law and is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.

b) It submitted that the present Application, being the second application for restoration, has been filed under Rule 11 and Rule 48 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 seeking restoration of RST.A. (IBC)/5/(CH)/2024, which was dismissed for want of prosecution vide order dated 23.10.2024. It is further submitted that Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 confers inherent powers upon this Tribunal to pass such Orders as may be necessary to meet the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of the Tribunal.

c) It is submitted that Rule 48 of the NCLT Rules governs the consequences of non-appearance of an Applicant and empowers the Tribunal, at its discretion, to dismiss an Application for default or decide it on merits. Further, where an Application is dismiss