In the matter of Shashi Mohan Garg.& Ors. Vs. International Asset Reconstruction Company Pvt Ltd & Anr. CA(AT)(Insolvency) No. 123-2019

The Appellant - shareholder of M/s. Atlanti Spinning & Weaving Mills Ltd. (Corporate Debtor) has preferred this appeal against order dated 9th October, 2018 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad. The appeal has been filed after the delay of 270 days on the only ground that the Appellant had no knowledge about the impugned order. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submitted that the impugned order was passed by the Adjudicating Authority without notice to the ‘Corporate Debtor’. However, from the impugned order we find that after notice nobody appeared, and, therefore, the Adjudicating Authority noted in the order sheets that nobody appears on behalf of the ‘Corporate Debtor’.

2. When we ask the counsel to address the case on merit, the only ground taken is that the application under Section 7 of the ‘Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016’ (for short, the ‘I&B Code’) was barred by limitation.

3. From the record, we find that the application under Section 7 of the I&B Code was filed by ‘International Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited’. The ‘Corporate Debtor’ having defaulted in repaying the amount of Rs. 70,22,04,757.31 as on 15th May, 2018, the petition was filed under Section 7 of the I&B Code after serving a copy of the same to the ‘Corporate Debtor’.

4. It further appears that the ‘Corporate Debtor’ had taken loan from Allahabad Bank, Ratnakar Bank Limited and Axis Bank Limited respectively. IDBI, Allahabad Bank (now IARC) and SBoP had moved before the ‘Debt Recovery Tribunal’ (‘DRT’), Mumbai by filing Original Application No. 292/2010. Since December, 2013 the ‘Corporate Debtor’ proposed for OTS and the latest proposal for OTS was dated 23rd September, 2015. Notice was sent to the ‘Corporate Debtor’ by order dated 7th September, 2018. During the pendency of the case, the ‘Assignment Agreement’ was reached between the aforesaid ‘Financial Creditor’ with the Respondent – ‘‘International Asset Reconstruction Company Private Limited’ on 15th February, 2014, 26th March, 2014 and 29th March, 2014. A notice was issued to the ‘Corporate Debtor’ by the Tribunal vide its order dated 7th September, 2018. The ‘postal receipt’ along with ‘postal track record’ showing the delivery status and it was shown consignment notice issued on the ‘Corporate Debtor’ served was also filed. In spite of the service of notice on the ‘Corporate Debtor’ failed to appear. All these facts have been noticed by the Adjudicating Authority while passing the order.

5. In the aforesaid background and in view of the fact that the appeal is barred by limitation as more than 240 days have passed, if we exclude 30 days of filing the appeal, we have no jurisdiction to condone the delay. As there is no ground also to interfere with the impugned order, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya]

Chairperson

[ Justice A.I.S. Cheema ]

Member (Judicial)

[ Kanthi Narahari ]

Member (Technical)

New Delhi

30th May, 2019