At, High Court of Judicature at Madras
By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. SATHYANARAYANAN & THE HONOURABLE DR.(MRS.) JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
For the Petitioner: M.S. Krishnan, Senior Counsel for M/s. Sarvabhauman Associates, Advocates. For the Respondents: G. Rajagopalan, Assistant Solicitor General of India assisted by Sunita Kumari, Advocate.
(Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the application made in IBA No.1459/2019 on the file of the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench.)
M. Sathyanarayanan, J.
1. The petitioner is challenging the order dated 05.05.2020 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Division Bench-I, Chennai, in and by which, the petition filed by the financial creditor / 1st respondent has been entertained under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short IBC), and in pursuant to the order, the Insolvency Resolution Professional [IRP] has also been appointed for the purpose of initiation of corporate insolvency resolution proceedings, in relation to the corporate debtors. The petitioner made a challenge to the said order by filing an appeal under Section 61 of the IBC.
2. Registry has put a Maintainability Note on the ground that even as per the Statute, an effective alternative remedy is available.
3. Mr.M.S.Krishnan, learned Senior Counsel for M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates has invited the attention of this Court to the Memo of Urgency dated 18.05.2020 and would submit that the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner at New Delhi had tried to file an appeal with application for interim relief before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) by E-mailing the soft copy of the appeal. But, the Registry of NCLAT has refused to entertain the soft copy of the file and required hard copy to be filed and on account of the present COVID 19 lock down, it cannot be done, especially on account of lack of transportation facilities for going to New Delhi and further points out that Insolvency Resolution Professional who came to be appointed in pursuant to the above cited order dated 05.05.2020, is also taking emergent steps to constitute a Committee of Creditors and prays for limited interim orders, till the petitioner moves NCLAT.
4. On the said submission, this Court heard the submission of Mr.G.Rajagopalan, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India assisted by Ms.Sunita Kumari, learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent and he would fairly submit that in the light of the contents of the Memo of Urgency, this Court may issue appropriate suitable direction to the 3rd respondent to entertain the appeal along with the application for interlocutory relief through e-mail, if the papers are otherwise in order and pass appropriate orders.
5. This Court has considered the rival submissions and also perused the materials placed before it.
6. This Court can take judicial notice of the fact that on account of COVID-19 lock down, the Institutions which are playing the adjudicatory role, including this Court, are entertaining fresh matters through E-mail and through Video Conferencing and are passing appropriate orders.
7. In the light of the urgency pleaded by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, this Court directs the 3rd respondent to entertain the appeal along with the application for interlocutory relief, if the papers are otherwise in order through E-mail / other electronic mode and by giving preference, shall take up the interlocutory application at the first instance through Video Conferencing and give a disposal as expeditiously as possible ; and for a period of three weeks from today, the Insolvency Resolution Professional shall defer decisions to constitute a Committee of Creditors and take over of the Management. The present order of interim direction is passed taking into consideration, the contents of the Memo of Urgency and it is passed without prejudice to the rights and contention of the contesting respondents.
8. The direction, as to the
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
entertainment of the appeal along with the application for interim relief by way of E-mail filing / other electronic mode, is to be taken as general direction by the 3rd respondent, so that similar kind of petitions need not be filed before the Registry of this Court. 9. The Civil Revision Petition stands disposed of at the SR stage. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.