National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
Doha Bank QPSC vs Anish Niranjan Nanavaty Resolution Professional of Reliance Infratel Ltd on 3 February 2021
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 65 of 2021
In the matter of:
Shubh Holdings Pte. Ltd.
....Appellant
Vs.
Anish Niranjan Nanavaty Resolution Professional of Reliance Infratel Ltd.
....Respondent
Present:
Appellant:
Mr. Rohan Rajdhakshya, Ms. Apoorva Gupta, Mr.
Dhaval Vora, Advocates.
Respondent:
Mr. Anoop Rawat, Ms. Kriti Kalyani, Advocates for R1.
Mr. Kamlendra Singh, Mr. Jinal Shah, Ms. Charu Bansal, Mr. Shubhabrata Chakraborti, Ms. Ankita Mandal, Advocates for R2.
Ms. Nafisa Khandeparkar, Ms. Saloni Thakker, Advocates for R3
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
(Through Virtual Mode) 03.02.2021: In view of the grounds urged and keeping in view the directions given by the Hon’ble Apex Court in suo moto jurisdiction as also by this Appellate Tribunal in suo moto jurisdiction in regard to extension of period of limitation, delay of 13 days in preferring the appeal is condoned. I.A. No.147 of 2021 stands disposed of.
2. An error appears to have crept in the cause list showing ‘Doha Bank Q.P.S.C’ as Appellant in place of ‘Shubh Holdings Pte. Ltd.’. Error is directed to be rectified. Contd/-…….
3. Mr. Anoop Rawat, Advocate appears for Respondent No.1. Mr. Jinal Shah, Advocate appears for Respondent No.2. Ms. Nafisa Khandeparkar, Advocate appears for Respondent No.3. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 are stated to be a proforma party and their presence is stated to be not essential.
4. Mr. Rohan Rajdhaksha, Advocate representing the Appellant submits that the order impugned in this appeal was also in issue in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.19 of 2021 which came to be disposed off by this Appellate Tribunal in terms of Judgment dated 19th January, 2021. It is submitted that the issues raised in the instant appeal are also identical to the grounds urged in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.19 of 2021 and the Judgment passed on 19th January, 2021 in the aforesaid appeal squarely covers the instant appeal.
5. It is pertinent to note that the aforesaid appeal being Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.19 of 2021 came to be disposed off in terms of para 7 of the Judgment, which reads as under: “7. In the given circumstances, we are of the opinion that this appeal can be disposed off with direction to the Adjudicating Authority to dispose off the aforesaid applications with utmost expedition, preferably within three weeks’ time and depending upon the outcome of such applications, if the impugned order requires to be reconsidered, the Adjudicating Authority would do the same after hearing the parties.”
6. We accordingly dispose off the instant appeal in terms of the aforesaid
Judgment.
Registry is directed to place a copy of the Judgment dated 19th January, 2021 passed in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.19 of 2021 on the record of this case and such Judgment shall form part of the order passed in this appeal today.
[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Acting Chairperson
[Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra] Member (Technical)
[Dr. Alok Srivastava] Member (Technical) AR/g