The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.9132 OF 2023 Bikash Swain …. Petitioner(s) Mr.L.Mishra,Adv. -versus- The Registrar, National Company Law Tribunal, Cuttack and others …. Opposite Party(s) Mr.B.S.Rayguru,CGC For O.P.1 CORAM: JUSTICE BISWANATH RATH Order No. 02. 1. 2.
Decision
ORDER 06.04.2023 Heard learned counsel for the Parties. This Writ Petition involves the following prayer:- till disposal of <It is therefore prayed that, this Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue RULE NISI, Calling upon the opposite parties as to show cause as to why an appropriate nature of writ/writ(s) and order(s) shall not be passed thereby restraining the Opp. Party No.2 for stopping all the liquidation process and consequential process pertaining to the liquidation of the Opp. Party No.5 and any handing over the property to any Third Party; till the disposal of the writ application/ or I.A. No.3/CB/2023, in C.P. No.1/CB/2021 pending in the NCLT, Cuttack, thereby quashing the impugned letter sent by email dtd.21.03.2023 with agenda for various steps to be taken pertaining to progress of liquidation under Annexure- 15. And further be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of writ of mandamus, thereby directing the Opp. Party No.1 to get the application bearing I.A. No.3/CB/2023, in C.P. No.1/CB/2021 be entertain and dispose of the same in the time bound manner to secure the ends of justice and avoid further delay of the case and losses cause to the petitioner. petition in Page 1 of 5 // 2 // And/or in the alternative, kindly issue an appropriate order(s)/writ(s)/ direction(s), which may be passed thereby reversing all the order(s)/ direction(s)/ process, etc. done by the learned Liquidator after the filing of I.A. No.3/CB/2023, in C.P. No.1/CB/2021 before the learned NCLT, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack, thereby declaring the same to be illegal and void one in the interest of justice, equity and fair play. And further be pleased to pass such other order/orders, writ/writs, direction/directions as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. And for which act of kindness, the Petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.= 3. From the submission of Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner, it appears, there is serious allegation against the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Cuttack in the bizarre manner of sittings and in the process the NCLT is unable to take up at least urgent application seeking interim prayer at the instance of the Petitioner claimed to be pending since 04.01.2023. 4. Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner alleges, even though the matter was taken up on 10.01.2023, the Registrar (In- Charge) appears to have been passed the order observing, <the NCLT, Cuttack Bench shall conduct proceedings on every Monday and Tuesday till decision of further orders. The Bench shall attend the matters through Video Conference and this order was in partial modification of order of even number dated 10.10.2021 and applicable from 15.09.20222 till further orders=. The matter appears to have been next taken up on 06.02.2023. 5. In reference to the proceeding dated 06.02.2023, Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner alleged that the proceeding on this date was simply adjourned to 20.03.2023 for paucity of time by the Bench. The matter again appears to have been taken on 20.03.2023 and again there is adjournment of the matter to 01.05.2023 for the Tribunal runs paucity of time. Page 2 of 5 // 3 // 6. Taking this Court to the bizarre affair of dealing with legal matters and keeping the interim application pending for months together, Mr.Mishra, learned counsel for the Petitioner alleges, the Petitioner since having an urgent interim application is unable to get an interim protection and in the meantime almost three months have passed and Petitioner is facing a serious threat of disposal of the property/assets involved. 7. Mr.Rayaguru, learned counsel for NCLT- Opposite Party No.1 of course has no dispute to the order passed by the Competent Authority in their sitting as indicated hereinabove but contests the allegation on the property that Cuttack Bench is not regular Bench and the Bench sit at their convenience. There is however no denial to only adjournment of the interim application in last three postings. Mr.Rayaguru, learned counsel for Opposite Party No.1 of course admits that there is heavy case load and assignment at different places to the particular Tribunal and thus it was not possible to take the urgent application moved by the Petitioner even. 8. Considering the allegation and the submission of Mr.Rayaguru, learned counsel for NCLT, this Court finds, in fact main Petition involved was brought in January 2023 along with the interim application involved, Petitioner has a serious interim application required to be considered urgently. In the meantime there have been three sittings of the NCLT, Cuttack. First sitting on 10.01.2023, second one taking place on 06.02.2023 and third one sitting on 20.03.2023, this Court likes to take note of the orders on the above three dates as follows:- 10.01.2023:- IA (Companies Act) No.6/CB/2023: This is an application filed for expeditious hearing of IA (Companies Act) No.3/CB/2022. IA (Companies Act) Page 3 of 5 // 4 // IA is allowed and accordingly, No.6/CB/2023 (Companies Act) No.3/CB/2023 taken on board today. IA (Companies Act) No.3/CB/2023: Ld. Counsel Mr.Lalitendu Mishra appears on behalf of the applicant. Ld. Liquidator Ms.Sagarika Mishra is also present. It is informed that reply affidavit has been served on applicant yesterday i.e., 09.01.2023. Hard copy of the same has been submitted in the Court today. Ld. Counsel appearing for the applicant seeks three days’ time to file rejoinder. Time is granted for the same. They may do so by following the procedure specified under NCLT Rules, 2016. List the matter on 16.01.2023 for further consideration. 06.02.2023 Due to paucity of time, the matter could not be taken up for hearing today. Adjourned to 20.03.2023.= 20.03.2023 Due to paucity of time, the matter could not be taken up for hearing today. Adjourned to 01.05.2023.= Reading the aforesaid three orders, this Court finds, there is only observation of paucity of time with the members and as a consequence there is only adjournment of the matters. It is strange to observe an interlocutory mater is kept pending for five months even after availability of Video Conference attending. 9. Looking to the application pending at the instance of the Petitioner, this Court finds, everyday Petitioner is anticipating there is some loss to him in absence of any interim protection. However there is no denial that there is remedy available through the NCLAT, the Appellate Authority. In the peculiar circumstance, this Court while observing that Petitioner in fact suffers if interim application is kept pending for such long time and in this situation Petitioner cannot go remediless. The Petitioner should not be deprived of approaching the Appellate Authority at least to consider the interim aspects. 10. In the process this Court while disposing of the Writ Petition observes, since the Petitioner has a clear remedy before the NCLAT, Page 4 of 5 // 5 // New Delhi, permits the Petitioner to approach the NCLAT at New Delhi to file appropriate application involving the interim protection till the NCLAT find it inconvenient at least to take up the interim matter for its consideration by the NCLAT. This Court hopes and trusts the NCLAT will also take care on the allegation and find regular sitting of these bodies, to check such allegation does not come any further at least to find purpose behind setting up such bodies does not get frustrated. 11. With this observation, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. S.Dash (Biswanath Rath) Judge Page 5 of 5