Case Note & Summary
The case involves an application by the Insolvent, Parmanand Sitlaprasad Pandey, seeking to set aside an ex-parte adjudication order passed in insolvency proceedings. The Insolvent filed a Notice of Motion with a delay of 22 days, which he sought to condone. The court heard the learned Advocate for one of the creditors, the learned Advocate for the Insolvents, and the learned Deputy Official Assignee. The court found that the Insolvent had sufficient cause for the delay and that the ex-parte order was passed without proper service of notice. Consequently, the court condoned the delay and set aside the ex-parte adjudication order, allowing the Insolvent to participate in the proceedings.
Headnote
A) Insolvency Law - Condonation of Delay - Sufficient Cause - Delay of 22 days in filing application to set aside ex-parte adjudication order condoned as the Insolvent had sufficient cause for non-appearance and the delay was not intentional (Paras 1-5).
B) Insolvency Law - Setting Aside Ex-Parte Order - Service of Notice - Ex-parte adjudication order set aside as the Insolvent was not properly served with notice of the insolvency petition, and the Insolvent had a valid defence (Paras 2-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the delay of 22 days in filing the application to set aside the ex-parte adjudication order should be condoned and whether the ex-parte order should be set aside.
Final Decision
The court condoned the delay of 22 days and set aside the ex-parte adjudication order, allowing the Insolvent to participate in the proceedings.
Law Points
- Condonation of delay
- Setting aside ex-parte order
- Sufficient cause
- Insolvency proceedings
- Service of notice
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (06) 84
Notice of Motion No. 9 of 2022 in Insolvency Petition No. 16 of 1999
Mr. Rajesh Jain a/w Mr. Rohit Jain and Ms. Neha Doshi i/by Legal Juris for Claimants Kunal Ved and Reena Ved, Mr. Anil Bagwe for Insolvents, Mr. A.J. Kesarkar, Dy. Official Assignee
Parmanand Sitlaprasad Pandey
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Application by Insolvent to set aside ex-parte adjudication order in insolvency proceedings.
Remedy Sought
Condonation of delay of 22 days and setting aside of ex-parte adjudication order.
Filing Reason
The Insolvent claimed that the ex-parte order was passed without proper service of notice and that he had sufficient cause for non-appearance.
Previous Decisions
Ex-parte adjudication order was passed in Insolvency Petition No. 16 of 1999.
Issues
Whether the delay of 22 days in filing the application should be condoned.
Whether the ex-parte adjudication order should be set aside.
Submissions/Arguments
Mr. Jain, learned Advocate for one of the Creditors, opposed the application.
Mr. Bagwe, learned Advocate for Insolvents, argued for condonation and setting aside.
Mr. A.J. Kesarkar, Dy. Official Assignee, submitted his views.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the Insolvent had sufficient cause for the delay and that the ex-parte order was passed without proper service of notice, warranting setting aside of the order.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard Mr. Jain, learned Advocate for one of the Creditor of the Insolvents, Mr. Bagwe, learned Advocate for Insolvents and the learned Deputy Official Assignee.
This Notice of Motion has been filed by Applicant / Insolvent No. 1 - Mr. Parmanand Sitlaprasad Pandey for seeking the following reliefs:- (a) That the delay of 22 days in filing the present Notice of Motion be condoned;
Procedural History
Insolvency Petition No. 16 of 1999 was filed, and an ex-parte adjudication order was passed. The Insolvent filed Notice of Motion No. 9 of 2022 with a delay of 22 days to set aside the ex-parte order. The motion was heard and disposed of on June 5, 2023.
Acts & Sections
- Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909:
