The case involves a petition filed by Mr. Birender Kumar against M/s. Adel Landmarks Ltd. under Section 9 of the IBC Code, 2016. The petitioner had previously filed winding up proceedings against the respondent company/corporate debtor before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The Tribunal noted that the petitioner did not disclose the pending winding up proceedings before the High Court, which was brought to the Tribunal's attention by the other side. The Tribunal viewed the prosecution of the petition before two forums as forum shopping.
Mr. Birender Kumar filed a petition against M/s. Adel Landmarks Ltd. under Section 9 of the IBC Code, 2016. Prior to this, the petitioner had initiated winding up proceedings against the same respondent company/corporate debtor in the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The petitioner did not disclose the pending winding up proceedings to the Tribunal. The respondent brought the existence of the High Court proceedings to the Tribunal's attention. The Tribunal considered the petitioner's actions as suppression of facts and an attempt at forum shopping. The relevance of the High Court proceedings is that they address the same underlying issues and could lead to conflicting outcomes if pursued simultaneously with the IBC petition.
Sign in to view the parties.
The petitioner filed Company petition C.P.…
The Tribunal dismissed the petition and imposed…
The case involves a petition filed by Mr. Birender Kumar against M/s. Adel Landmarks Ltd. under Section 9 of the IBC Code, 2016. The petitioner had previously filed winding up proceedings against the respondent company/corporate debtor before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The Tribunal noted that the petitioner did not disclose the pending winding up proceedings before the High Court, which was brought to the Tribunal's attention by the other side. The Tribunal viewed the prosecution of the petition before two forums as forum shopping.
Mr. Birender Kumar filed a petition against M/s. Adel Landmarks Ltd. under Section 9 of the IBC Code, 2016. Prior to this, the petitioner had initiated winding up proceedings against the same respondent company/corporate debtor in the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The petitioner did not disclose the pending winding up proceedings to the Tribunal. The respondent brought the existence of the High Court proceedings to the Tribunal's attention. The Tribunal considered the petitioner's actions as suppression of facts and an attempt at forum shopping. The relevance of the High Court proceedings is that they address the same underlying issues and could lead to conflicting outcomes if pursued simultaneously with the IBC petition.
The petitioner filed Company petition C.P.…
The Tribunal dismissed the petition and imposed…