High Court can entertain Writ Petition if IBBI’s order effects the work of an Insolvency Professional in its territorial jurisdiction – Partha Sarathy Sarkar Vs. Insolvency & Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) – Bombay High Court
September 30, 2022
In this case, the Registration of Petitioner as Insolvency Professional is suspended for a period of three years under the impugned order dated 24.06.2022. IBBI (and other Respondents) contended that on the basis of principle of forum conveniens, the Petitioner ought to have filed the Petition before the Delhi High Court. Hon’ble High Court entertained the Writ Petition and held that the Petitioner acts as a Resolution Professional and has work on hand at Mumbai. He is appointed as an IP by the Mumbai Bench for Wholesale Foods P.Ltd. and the said proceeding is pending adjudication before NCLT, Mumbai Bench. The Petitioner is empanelled as IP for financial institution in Mumbai. The Petitioner is also appointed in voluntary liquidation of Gulf India Ltd. before NCLT Mumbai Bench. The effect of the impugned order of suspension will be felt by the Petitioner even in the State of Maharashtra. The Court held that pursuant to the order of suspension, the Petitioner would not be in a position to work as a Resolution Professional with the assignments on hand in the State of Maharashtra. The Petitioner is already having assignments in the State of Maharashtra as a Resolution Professional. As the effect of the impugned order will be felt by the Petitioner in the State of Maharashtra, it can safely be concluded that part of cause of action has arisen with the territorial jurisdiction of this court.