# In the matter of Anand Varma Advocate Vs. Piyush Periwal & Ors.,Company Appeal (AT)(Ins.)No. 804 of 2022

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-11-04. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00123. The case involves an appeal filed by Anand Varma, an advocate, against remarks made against…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 4 Nov 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00123
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/anand-varma-advocate-vs-piyush-periwal-orscompany-appeal-e88c4688

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal filed by Anand Varma, an advocate, against remarks made against him in an order dated 08.04.2022 by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Guwahati Bench in I.A (IBC)/43/2021 in C.P. (IB)/09/GB/2019. The appellant had appeared as an advocate on behalf of Respondent No. 2, the Resolution Professional, in the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) of National Plywood Industries Ltd. The Adjudicating Authority made observations regarding a potential conflict of interest due to the appellant also filing a Section 7 application on behalf of Damayanti Tea Industries, a unit of CCIPL, while representing the Resolution Professional. Respondent No. 1 filed an I.A alleging inter alia conflict of interest and collusion

…

## Facts

On 08.04.2022, the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Guwahati Bench, passed an order in I.A (IBC)/43/2021 in C.P. (IB)/09/GB/2019, which contained remarks against Anand Varma, an advocate. Anand Varma had appeared as an advocate on behalf of the Resolution Professional (Respondent No. 2) in the CIRP of National Plywood Industries Ltd. The CIRP was initiated based on an application filed by Financial Creditor- ‘Stressed Assets Stabilization Fund (SASF)’under Section 7. The Adjudicating Authority observed that Anand Varma had also filed a Section 7 application on behalf of 'Damayanti Tea Industries', a unit of CCIPL, while representing the Resolution Professional, leading to concerns about a potential conflict of interest. Respondent No. 1 filed an

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the observations made by the Adjudicating Authority against the Appellant were justified …

**Ratio:** The court relied on the principle that observations made by a judicial authority should

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the observations made in paragraph 17.3 of the Adjudicating

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of the legal principle is that judicial remarks should be

…

**Application:** The court applied the ratio to the facts of the case, finding that the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Alok Sriv…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Anand V…
- **Respondents:** National Plywood…; Piyush Pe…

## Timeline

- **2019-08-26 — CIRP Init…**: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against the Corporate…
- **2019-11-09 — Form-G Publ…**: The Resolution Professional published Form-G dated 09.11.2019 inviting Expressions of…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 7 — Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-7)

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/anand-varma-advocate-vs-piyush-periwal-orscompany-appeal-e88c4688