The Adjudicating Authority are not empowered to entertain the order passed by the foreign jurisdiction in the case, where the registered office of the Corporate Debtor company is situated in India, and the jurisdiction specifically lies with this court – State Bank of India Vs. Jet Airways (India) Limited – NCLT Mumbai
June 20, 2019
The objections raised by the Intervener is based on the order passed by the Noord Holland District Court, Netherland.
It is pertinent to mention that Section 234-235 of IBC, 2016 deals with the matter regarding the agreement with foreign countries and the letter of request to a country outside India in the insolvency Resolution Process where the assets of the corporate debtor exist outside India.
The above provision of IB Code is yet to be notified hence not enforceable. Therefore, we as the Adjudicating Authority are not empowered to entertain the order passed by the foreign jurisdiction in the case, where the registered office of the Corporate Debtor company is situated in India, and the jurisdiction specifically lies with this court. Therefore, we cannot pass any order to withhold the Insolvency proceedings pending in our court based on the order of insolvency passed by any other jurisdiction, which is not authorised to pass order for the company, which is registered in India and the jurisdiction solely lies with this court.
The contention of the Intervener is that peculiar situation will arise by running two parallel proceedings against the same corporate debtor, and it will lead to complications and delays in resolution of insolvency is not sustainable. It is to be clarified that the order of the foreign court is a nullity in the eye of law and such order cannot be given effect.
The question of running two parallel proceedings does not arise. The order passed by Noord Holland District Court, Netherland for the company registered in India is nullity ab-initio.
