High Court of Bombay Admits Appeal Against Order Vacating Ex-Parte Stay on NCLT Proceedings in Corporate Insolvency Case. Company Petition for Winding Up Admitted Prior to IBC Application; Court to Determine Jurisdiction Overlap Between Winding Up and Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Issue of Consideration

Whether the NCLT is barred from proceeding with an application under Section 10 of the IBC, 2016 when a winding up petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 is already admitted and pending, in light of the repeal of SICA and provisions of the Repeal Act, 2003.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Law Points

  • Corporate debtor with pending BIFR reference as on 1 December 2016 entitled to file application under Section 10 IBC within 180 days
  • Section 22 SICA suspended winding up and other proceedings against sick company
  • Repeal Act 2003 provided abatement of references and allowed reference to NCLT under IBC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2018 LawText (BOM) (07) 66

Appeal Lodging No. 68 of 2018 in Company Application No. 572 of 2017 in Company Petition No. 434 of 2015

2018-07-26

Naresh H. Patil, G. S. Kulkarni

2018:BHC-OS:10738-DB

Zal Andhyarujina, Akansha Agarwal, Silpa Nair, Lizun Wangdi, Akshay Aurora (for appellant); Janak Dwarkadas, Ankita Singhania, Amir Arsiwala, Omprakash Jha, Ragha Shekhar (for respondent); Nikhil Rajani, Jyoti Sanap (for interveners)

Jotun India Private Limited

PSL Limited

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against an order of the Single Judge vacating an ex-parte ad-interim order that restrained the National Company Law Tribunal from proceeding with a corporate insolvency resolution process application filed by the respondent corporate debtor.

Remedy Sought

Appellant original petitioner in winding up petition sought to set aside the order vacating restraint on NCLT and to maintain status quo pending winding up proceedings.

Filing Reason

Dispute arose out of unpaid invoices of Rs.7.25 crores; appellant filed company petition for winding up under Sections 433, 434 Companies Act, 1956; respondent filed an application under Section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 before NCLT, leading to competing proceedings.

Previous Decisions

Company Petition admitted on 9 March 2017; Single Judge on 19 July 2017 granted ex-parte order restraining NCLT from proceeding with IBC application; said order was challenged in Appeal (L) No. 280 of 2017 which was withdrawn after Division Bench kept question of jurisdiction open; Single Judge on 5 January 2018 vacated the restraint order, holding no bar on NCLT proceeding with IBC application.

Issues

Whether the National Company Law Tribunal is barred from entertaining the respondent's application under Section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, given the pendency of an admitted winding up petition under Sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956. Interpretation of Section 4(b) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003 and whether it confers exclusive jurisdiction on NCLT after abatement of BIFR reference. Effect of Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 on proceedings after its repeal.

Judgment Excerpts

On 1/12/2016 the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003 (for short the Repeal Act, 2003) was notified and the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (for short the SICA) came to be repealed. Under the provisions of Section 4(b) of the Repeal Act, 2003 (as amended by the IBC, 2016), a company, whose reference was pending before the BIFR as on 1/12/2016, was entitled to file an application under Section 10 of the IBC, 2016 within a period of 180 days from the notification of the Repeal Act, 2003 i.e. on or before 31/5/2017. Section 22 (1) of the SICA reads as under :- “ 22. Suspension of legal proceedings, contracts, etc. - (1) Where in respect of an industrial company, an inquiry under section 16 is pending ... no proceedings for the winding up of the industrial company ... shall lie or be proceeded with further, except with the consent of the Board or, as the case may be, the Appellate Authority.”

Procedural History

10 March 2015: Appellant Jotun India filed Company Petition No. 434 of 2015 under Sections 433, 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking winding up and claiming Rs.7.25 crores. Respondent PSL Limited made reference to BIFR. 1 December 2016: SICA Repeal Act 2003 notified, SICA repealed, IBC came into force. 9 March 2017: Company Petition admitted. 29 May 2017: PSL Limited filed IBC application under Section 10 before NCLT Ahmedabad within 180-day period. 18 July 2017: NCLT heard matter, reserved orders; same day, appellant filed Company Application (L) No. 333 of 2017 for appointment of provisional liquidator. 19 July 2017: Single Judge passed ex-parte order restraining NCLT from proceeding with IBC application. 20 July 2017: PSL Limited filed Appeal (L) No. 280 of 2017 against restraint order; Division Bench on 1 August 2017 kept question of jurisdiction open; appeal withdrawn, stay continued. 15 September 2017: PSL Limited filed Company Application No. 572 of 2017 to vacate order dated 19 July 2017. 5 January 2018: Single Judge vacated restraint order, held NCLT not barred. 7 February 2018: Appellant Jotun filed present appeal against order dated 5 January 2018.

Acts & Sections

  • Companies Act, 1956: 433, 434
  • Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985: 22
  • Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Repeal Act, 2003: 4(b)
  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: 10, 12, 14, 22
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Allows Regular Second Appeal in Property Suit Due to First Appellate Court's Failure to Comply with Order XLI Rule 31 CPC. The First Appellate Court's judgment was set aside for not independently analyzing evidence and not fra...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Bombay Admits Appeal Against Order Vacating Ex-Parte Stay on NCLT Proceedings in Corporate Insolvency Case. Company Petition for Winding Up Admitted Prior to IBC Application; Court to Determine Jurisdiction Overlap Between Winding Up an...