Filing appeal u/s 61, Appellant need to prove that he/she is aggrieved by the Impugned Order and is an interested party for preferring the appeal u/s 61 – Simran Kaur Shareholder of M/s. Datawind Innovations Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s. Haiko Logistics India Pvt. Ltd.- NCLAT New Delhi

The present appeal has been preferred by a shareholder of the Corporate Debtor under Section 61 of the Code aggrieved by the Impugned Order of initiation of the CIRP against the Corporate Debtor. The Learned Counsel for Respondent No.1 has stated that though the Appellant has claimed to be a shareholder in the Corporate Debtor Company, she has not provided any evidence of the same. Therefore, she does not have a right to prefer this appeal.
NCLAT held that the Appellant has not provided any evidence of her being a shareholder in the Corporate Debtor Company in the form of share certificate or any other document.  In view of the provision under Section 61(1) of IBC that any person aggrieved by the order of the Adjudicating Authority may prefer an appeal, the Appellant has not been able to show as to how she is aggrieved by the Impugned Order and is an interested party for preferring this appeal. Moreover, since the authorised representative of the Corporate Debtor in the matter that was filed before the Adjudicating Authority has chosen not to file any appeal against the Impugned Order it was necessary for the Appellant to establish her locus standi for filing this appeal. The appeal is thus not maintainable as it doesn’t satisfy the criterion for preferring an appeal, as set out in Section 61(1) of the IBC.

Filing appeal u/s 61, Appellant need to prove that he/she is aggrieved by the Impugned Order and is an interested party for preferring the appeal u/s 61 – Simran Kaur Shareholder of M/s. Datawind Innovations Pvt. Ltd. Vs. M/s. Haiko Logistics India Pvt. Ltd.- NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »