Supreme Court Allows Appeal in Sabka Vishwas Scheme Case Due to Legal Impediment Preventing Payment. Legal Moratorium Under IBC Prevented Payment of Settlement Amount Under the Scheme.

In Favour of Accused
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved M/s. Shekhar Resorts Limited, which appealed against a High Court decision dismissing its writ petition seeking relief under the Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme, 2019. The appellant, a hospitality service provider, faced investigations for service tax evasion, leading to proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). The NCLT admitted the application against the appellant on 11.09.2018, imposing a moratorium that lasted until 24.07.2020. The appellant submitted an application under the Scheme on 27.12.2019, and was issued Form No.3 on 25.02.2020, requiring payment of Rs.1,24,28,500/- by 30.06.2020. However, due to the moratorium, the appellant could not make the payment. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the Designated Committee under the Scheme no longer existed after 30.06.2020. The appellant contended that it was legally barred from making payments during the moratorium and sought to have its payment accepted post-moratorium. The Supreme Court analyzed whether the appellant could be penalized for not making the payment due to legal restrictions. The court emphasized that no party should be left remediless and that it is unjust to compel a party to perform an impossible act. The court found that the appellant was entitled to relief under the Scheme and directed that the payment be appropriated towards the settlement dues, quashing the High Court's order. The appeal was allowed, and a discharge certificate was to be issued to the appellant.

Headnote

A) Insolvency Law - Moratorium - Legal Impediment to Payment - Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 14 - The appellant was unable to make payment under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme due to a legal moratorium imposed by the IBC, which prevented any payments during that period. The court held that the appellant should not be punished for failing to perform an impossible act due to statutory restrictions (Paras 6-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant can be penalized for not depositing the settlement amount due to legal impediments under the IBC.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the High Court's order, and directed that the payment of Rs.1,24,28,500/- be appropriated towards settlement dues under the Scheme, with a discharge certificate to be issued to the appellant.

Law Points

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
  • 2016
  • moratorium
  • legal disability
  • Sabka Vishwas Scheme
  • 2019
  • statutory compliance
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (SC) (01) 223

Civil Appeal No.8957 of 2022

2023-01-05

M.R. Shah, B.V. Nagarathna

Charanya Lakshmikumaran, Vikramjit Banerji

M/s. Shekhar Resorts Limited

Union of India & Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against dismissal of writ petition seeking relief under the Sabka Vishwas Scheme.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to have payment accepted under the Scheme and obtain a discharge certificate.

Filing Reason

The appellant was unable to make payment due to a legal moratorium under the IBC.

Previous Decisions

The High Court dismissed the writ petition, stating the Designated Committee no longer existed.

Issues

Whether the appellant can be penalized for not depositing the settlement amount due to legal impediments under the IBC.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that legal moratorium prevented payment under the Scheme. Respondent contended that the Scheme was closed and no payments could be accepted post-deadline.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that a party cannot be penalized for failing to perform an impossible act due to legal restrictions, emphasizing that no party should be left remediless.

Judgment Excerpts

The appellant cannot be punished for not doing something which was impossible for it to do. The High Court has erred in refusing to grant any relief to the appellant as prayed.

Procedural History

The appellant filed a writ petition which was dismissed by the High Court, leading to the present appeal before the Supreme Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: Section 7, Section 14
  • Finance Act, 2019: Section 125
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Departmental Appeal in Police Misconduct Disciplinary Proceedings; Tribunal Order Quashing Charge Memo Set Aside. Charge Memo Against Police Inspector Alleged Connection to Incriminating Payments Found Sufficient to Proceed; Tru...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Insurance Company's Appeal in Motor Accident Claim — Reduces Compensation Due to Contributory Negligence of Deceased. Deceased pedestrian held 50% contributorily negligent for crossing highway without care, reducing insurer...