The case involves an appeal against an order passed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, admitting an application by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench. The appellant contends that the order was passed without hearing the 'Corporate Debtor', who intended to settle the dispute. The appellant also argues that the order violates the principle of Natural Justice, citing a decision of the Appellate Tribunal in "Innoventive Industries Ltd. Vs. ICICI Bank".
Tiger Steel Engineering (India) Pvt. Ltd. is the 'Corporate Debtor'. Batliboi Impex Limited is the respondent. An order was passed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, admitting an application by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench. The 'Corporate Debtor' intended to settle the dispute but was not heard before the order was passed. The appellant claims the order violates the principle of Natural Justice. The appellant's counsel states that two drafts have been prepared and handed over to the respondent's counsel, worth approximately Rs. 28.69 lakhs. The respondent's counsel submits that if a total amount of Rs. 33 lakhs is paid, they have no objection to closing the Resolution Process.
Sign in to view the parties.
Order passed under Section 9 of the Insolvency…
Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant…
The case involves an appeal against an order passed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, admitting an application by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench. The appellant contends that the order was passed without hearing the 'Corporate Debtor', who intended to settle the dispute. The appellant also argues that the order violates the principle of Natural Justice, citing a decision of the Appellate Tribunal in "Innoventive Industries Ltd. Vs. ICICI Bank".
Tiger Steel Engineering (India) Pvt. Ltd. is the 'Corporate Debtor'. Batliboi Impex Limited is the respondent. An order was passed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, admitting an application by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumbai Bench. The 'Corporate Debtor' intended to settle the dispute but was not heard before the order was passed. The appellant claims the order violates the principle of Natural Justice. The appellant's counsel states that two drafts have been prepared and handed over to the respondent's counsel, worth approximately Rs. 28.69 lakhs. The respondent's counsel submits that if a total amount of Rs. 33 lakhs is paid, they have no objection to closing the Resolution Process.
Order passed under Section 9 of the Insolvency…
Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant…