09/07/2024

A party cannot invoke appellate jurisdiction under Section 61 of IBC, 2016 against main order of NCLT without giving a challenge to the order passed on IA, rejecting his intervention – M.K. Resely and Ors. Vs. Union Bank of India and Ors. – NCLAT Chennai

Hon’ble NCLAT interprets the word `Aggrieved Person’ in section 61 of IBC that:

(i) The “Aggrieved Person’’ in the context of the terminology used under Section 61 (1) of IBC, would be a person who has not been conscious of an Impugned Order that prejudices his material right and such person could still invoke an Appellate Jurisdiction by seeking the leave of the Court.
(ii) Merely because of the fact that they were heard or they were described as Additional Respondents, before the NCLT, they will not get the status of being a party to the proceedings which will enable them to file an Appeal.
(iii) Concealment of a fact or distortion of a fact would be a sufficient ground to decline the interference, while exercising the Appellate Jurisdiction under Section 61 of the I & B Code, 2016.

A party cannot invoke appellate jurisdiction under Section 61 of IBC, 2016 against main order of NCLT without giving a challenge to the order passed on IA, rejecting his intervention – M.K. Resely and Ors. Vs. Union Bank of India and Ors. – NCLAT Chennai Read Post »

Third Member’s decision on Certified Copy vs. Free Copy: Free Copy provided under NCLT Rule 50 cannot be treated as to be a Certified Copy referred to under NCLAT Rule 22(2) and the Free Copy will not satisfy to be a Certified Copy, as defined under NCLT Rule, to be read with Section 76 of the Evidence Act – State Bank of India Vs. India Power Corporation Ltd. – NCLAT Chennai

The Company Appeal has been placed before third member of NCLAT in response to a question referred to be answered, because of the dissenting opinion of the Bench of Two Members on an issue, as to how the aspect pertaining to the “Certified Copy’’, could be construed for the purposes of filing of an Appeal, under Section 61 of IBC.

Hon’ble Third Member agrees with decision of Member (Judicial) holding that the Free Copy provided under Rule 50 of NCLT Rules, 2016, cannot be treated as to be a Certified Copy referred to under Rule 22(2) of NCLAT Rules, 2016, and the Free Copy will not satisfy to be a Certified Copy, as defined under Section 2(j) of the NCLT Rules, to be read with Section 76 of the Evidence Act.

Third Member’s decision on Certified Copy vs. Free Copy: Free Copy provided under NCLT Rule 50 cannot be treated as to be a Certified Copy referred to under NCLAT Rule 22(2) and the Free Copy will not satisfy to be a Certified Copy, as defined under NCLT Rule, to be read with Section 76 of the Evidence Act – State Bank of India Vs. India Power Corporation Ltd. – NCLAT Chennai Read Post »

Scroll to Top