# In the matter of HPCL Biofuels Ltd. IA(IBC)-889-KB-2022 in C.P (IB) No.1422-KB-2018

> NCLT judgment dated 2023-02-07. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLT-04741. This case involves an application filed under Rule 11 read with Rule 49 of the National Company…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 7 Feb 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLT-04741
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/hpcl-biofuels-ltd-iaibc-889-kb-2022-in-cp-ib-no1422-kb-2018-1d2ab3e6

## Summary

### Background

This case involves an application filed under Rule 11 read with Rule 49 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016, seeking to set aside an order dated May 23, 2022, passed by the Adjudicating Authority. The applicant sought to recall or modify the order, which directed the applicant to pay the CIRP cost in favor of the Respondent/IRP. It was alleged that the Respondent did not present clean facts and failed to submit correct details of expenses and fees.

## Facts

M/s S.S. Engineers initiated a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against a Corporate Debtor. Mr. Nitesh Kumar More was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). An order dated 12/02/2020 admitted the Corporate Debtor under CIRP, appointing the applicant as IRP. Subsequently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in an order dated 26/02/2021, remitted the appeal to the NCLAT for final hearing. The NCLAT, vide order dated 10/01/2022, allowed the appeal and set aside the Adjudicating Authority's order dated 12/02/2020, releasing the Corporate Debtor from CIRP. The IRP filed a Final Progress Report on 08/03/2022, claiming CIRP costs. The Adjudicating Authority passed an order on 23rd May, 2022, directing the applicant to pay the CIRP cost in favor of the

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Tribunal has the power to recall its own order, particularly an ex parte order, where a …

**Ratio:** The Tribunal does not have the power to recall an ex parte order where a decision has

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal considered Rule 49(2) of the NCLT Rules, 2016, and Rule 11, which provide

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of Rule 49(2) and Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016, is that

…

**Application:** In this case, the Tribunal determined that the order dated 23rd May, 2022, was

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** BIDISHA BA…; Balraj…
- **Appellants:** M/S S.S ENG…
- **Respondents:** Nitesh Kuma…
- **Advocates:** Ritoban S…; Abhidipto T…; +4 more

## Timeline

- **2020-02-12 — Corporate Debtor…**: The Corporate Debtor was admitted under CIRP,…
- **2021-02-26 — Supreme Cour…**: The Hon'ble Supreme Court remitted the appeal to the NCLAT for final hearing in Civil…

---

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/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/hpcl-biofuels-ltd-iaibc-889-kb-2022-in-cp-ib-no1422-kb-2018-1d2ab3e6