National Company Law Appellate Tribunal

Union Bank of India vs Athena Demwe Power Ltd on 9 March 2021

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

NEW DELHI

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No.172 of 2021

[Arising out of Order dated 03.02.2021 passed by National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench (Court – II) in (IB)- 244(ND)/2017]

IN THE MATTER OF:

Before NCLT

Before NCLAT

Union Bank of India

Applicant/

Appellant

(Erstwhile Corporation

Petitioner

Bank)

Stressed Assets Management

Branch

M-93 Connaught Place,

New Delhi 110001

Versus

M/s. Athena Demwe Power

Respondent

Respondent

Ltd.

Front Side, Third Floor,

Part of Property

No.E-561, 561-A,

G.R. Plaza, Palam,

Sector – 7, Dwarka

New Delhi – 110075

For Appellant:

Shri Alok Kumar and Shri Abhayveer Sharma, Advocates

For Respondent:

Shri Arun Kathpalia, Sr. Advocate (Intervener)

Shri Sujoy Datta (RA)

O R D E R

(Virtual Mode) 09.03.2021 Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant. Senior Counsel – Mr. Arun Kathpalia intervened on behalf of one of the Resolution Plan Applicant. It is stated by the learned Counsel for the Appellant that

Page 1 of 2

Application under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC – in short) was admitted on 28.09.2017 and in spite of passing of more than 1316 days, the matter is still pending before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench - Court II). It is numbered as (IB)- 244(ND)/2017. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the Appellant that in the CIRP, even Resolution Plan has been approved by COC (Committee of Creditors) and is pending before the Adjudicating Authority for approval since 11th July, 2018. The learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Application CA 235 of 2018 was filed by Navyuga Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd. on 22nd June, 2018 when the said Resolution Applicant was treated as disqualified under Section 29A of IBC. Mr. Kathpalia appearing for the said Resolution Applicant, is present and agrees with the learned Counsel for the Appellant. Both the learned Counsel state that since then, the matter has been pending and adjourned on various dates before the learned Adjudicating Authority. At one point of time, CA 235 of 2018 was even heard and Orders were reserved as can be seen from (Annexure A-9 – Page 59). However, thereafter, the Member (Judicial) retired and then the matter again got reopened and has remained pending as it is stated that last year around March, Pandemic set in, and so the matter has got delayed. The learned Counsel for both sides accept that the docket of the Adjudicating Authority is busy but still make a request that efforts need to be made to dispose CA 235 of 2018 and Adjudicating Authority needs to pass further Orders in the matter with regard to other pending Applications also.

Considering the facts stated, the present Appeal is disposed with a request to the learned Adjudicating Authority to make an effort to dispose the pending IAs in 244(ND)/2017 at the earliest.

The Appeal is disposed accordingly.

[Justice A.I.S. Cheema]

Member (Judicial)

[Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical) rs/md

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead