The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 126 CWP-14348-2025 2025 DATE OF DECISION: 19.05.2025 DATE OF DECISION: 19.05.2025 NIPAN BANSAL NIPAN BANSAL Versus … Petitioner UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF CORPORATE AFFAIRS AND OTHERS CORPORATE AFFAIRS HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA Mr. Pulkit Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Present: Mr. Pulkit Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pulkit Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. ... Respondents
Legal Reasoning
Mr. Aditya Sharda, Advocate and Mr. Aditya Sharda, Advocate and Mr.Piyush Khanna, Advocate for U.O.I./respondent No.1. Mr.Piyush Khanna, Advocate for U.O.I./respondent No.1. Mr.Piyush Khanna, Advocate for U.O.I./respondent No.1. **** ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is impugning the Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is impugning the Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is impugning the Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is impugning the letter No.Liq-12011/214/2023 12011/214/2023-IBBI/840 dated 18.07.2023 1) IBBI/840 dated 18.07.2023 (Annexure P-1) He issued by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India/respondent No.2. He issued by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India issued by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India quashing of subsequent action/order dated 08.05.2025 has also sought quashing of subsequent action/order dated 08.05.2025 quashing of subsequent action/order dated 08.05.2025 has also sought 9) passed by respondent No.4 vide which respondent No.3 has (Annexure P-9) passed by respondent No.4 vide which respondent No.3 has 9) passed by respondent No.4 vide which respondent No.3 has 9) passed by respondent No.4 vide which respondent No.3 has petitioner. been appointed as the Liquidator in place of the petitioner. been appointed as the Liquidator in place of 2. 3. Heard. Heard. petitioner has challenged the order passed by the National The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the National petitioner has challenged the order passed by the National The Company Law Tribunal (for short -‘NCLT’) on 08.05.2025 (Annexure P Company Law Tribunal (for short 9) on 08.05.2025 (Annexure P-9) of the Corporate whereby respondent No.3 has been appointed as Liquidator of the Corporate whereby respondent No.3 has been appointed as Liquidator whereby respondent No.3 has been appointed as Liquidator Debtor namely M/s Cheema Spintex Ltd. M/s Cheema Spintex Ltd. The petitioner instead of challenging The petitioner instead of challenging ational Company Law the order of NCLT by preferring an appeal before the National Company Law the order of NCLT by preferring an appeal before the N the order of NCLT by preferring an appeal before the N Appellate Tribunal (for short -‘NCLAT’), ha Appellate Tribunal ( approached this Court by , has approached this Court by preferring the instant writ petition. When an alternative remedy is provided preferring the instant writ petition by hen an alternative remedy is provided by his Court would exercise writ jurisdiction only in exceptional cases the Statute, this Court would exercise writ jurisdiction only in exceptional cases his Court would exercise writ jurisdiction only in exceptional cases his Court would exercise writ jurisdiction only in exceptional cases which include-when the order is when the order is passed without jurisdiction or in complete without jurisdiction or in complete principles of natural justice. violation of the principles of natural justice. SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.05.29 11:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2025 CWP-14348-2025 Reference can be made to judgment of the Supreme Court in the Reference can be made to judgment of the Supreme Court in the Reference can be made to judgment of the Supreme Court in the Reference can be made to judgment of the Supreme Court in the . The PHR Invent Educational Society Vs. UCO Bank, 2024 INSC 297. The case of PHR Invent Educational Society Vs. UCO Bank PHR Invent Educational Society Vs. UCO Bank relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced hereunder:- relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced hereunder: relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced hereunder: out It could thus clearly be seen that the Court has carved out 9. It could thus clearly be seen that the Court has carved “29. exceptions when a petition under Article 226 of the certain exceptions when a petition under Article 226 of the exceptions when a petition under Article 226 of the certain could be entertained in spite of availability of an Constitution could be entertained in spite of availability of an could be entertained in spite of availability of an Constitution alternative remedy. alternative remedy. Some of them are thus: Some of them are thus: (i) where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with (i) where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with (i) where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with (i) where the statutory authority has not acted in accordance with the provisions of the provisions of the enactment in question; (ii) it has acted in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial (ii) it has acted in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial (ii) it has acted in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial (ii) it has acted in defiance of the fundamental principles of judicial procedure; procedure; (iii) it has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed; and (iii) it has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed; and (iii) it has resorted to invoke the provisions which are repealed; and (iv) when an order has been passed in total violation of the (iv) when an order has been passed in total violation of the (iv) when an order has been passed in total violation of the (iv) when an order has been passed in total violation of the principles of natural justice.” principles the enactment in question; 4. the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case We may also refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case We may also refer to of South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. Naveen Mathew Philip, 2023 (2) RCR (Civil) South Indian Bank Ltd. Vs. Naveen Mathew Philip, 2023 (2) RCR (Civil) Ltd. Vs. Naveen Mathew Philip, 2023 (2) RCR (Civil) The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced hereunder: 771. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced hereunder: The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced hereunder: The principles of law which emerge are that: “27. The principles of law which emerge are that: “27. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx An alternate remedy by itself does not divest the High Court An alternate remedy by itself does not divest the High Court 27.4. An alternate remedy by itself does not divest the High Court 27.4. of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution in an appropriate of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution in an appropriate of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution in an appropriate of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution in an appropriate tained case though ordinarily, a writ petition should not be entertained case though ordinarily, a writ petition should not be enter case though ordinarily, a writ petition should not be enter when an efficacious alternate remedy is provided by law. when an efficacious alternate remedy is provided by law. when an efficacious alternate remedy is provided by law. When a right is created by a statute, which itself prescribes When a right is created by a statute, which itself prescribes 27.5. When a right is created by a statute, which itself prescribes 27.5. the remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort the remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort the remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort the remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort must be had to that particular statutory remedy before invoking the must be had to that particular statutory remedy before invoking the must be had to that particular statutory remedy before discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution. This discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution. This discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution. This discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution. This rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies is a rule of policy, rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies is a rule of policy, rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies is a rule of policy, rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies is a rule of policy, convenience and discretion.” convenience and discretion.” 5. Furthermore, the petitioner is also Furthermore, t impugning the letter dated also impugning the letter dated 18.07.2023 (Annexure P (Annexure P-1) issued by Insolvency , nsolvency & Bankruptcy Board of India, after a period of almost 2 years. He does not seem to have challenged this letter after a period of almost 2 years. He does not seem to have challenged this letter after a period of almost 2 years. He does not seem to have challenged this letter after a period of almost 2 years. He does not seem to have challenged this letter rushed to this Court. It is not for this Court to before the NCLT and instead has rushed to this Court. It is not for this Court to rushed to this Court. It is not for this Court to before the NCLT and instead ha dent No.3 ought not to have been appointed as decide as to whether respondent No.3 ought not to have been appointed as dent No.3 ought not to have been appointed as decide as to whether respon would be more qualified to act as a Liquidator instead of the petitioner who would be more qualified to act as a would be more qualified to act as a Liquidator instead SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.05.29 11:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 2 2025 CWP-14348-2025 in the domain of the NCLT to adjudicate such Liquidator. It is entirely within the domain of the NCLT to adjudicate such in the domain of the NCLT to adjudicate such Liquidator. It is entirely matters. 6. It is trite law that the Insolvency and It is trite law that is a Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is a also complete Code in itself and interference by this Court at this juncture would also complete Code in itself and interference by this Court at this juncture would complete Code in itself and interference by this Court at this juncture would law laid down by the Supreme Court in the be wholly unwarranted in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the be wholly unwarranted in view of case of Mohammed Enterprises (Tanzania) Ltd. Versus Farooq Ali Khan Mohammed Enterprises (Tanzania) Ltd. Versus Farooq Ali Khan Mohammed Enterprises (Tanzania) Ltd. Versus Farooq Ali Khan Mohammed Enterprises (Tanzania) Ltd. Versus Farooq Ali Khan held that and others, AIR 2025 Supreme Court 1079 wherein it has been held that and others, AIR 2025 Supreme Court 1079 and others, AIR 2025 Supreme Court 1079 is a complete Code in itself and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 is a complete Code in itself and is a complete Code in itself and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 efore, the writ Court adequate remedies have been provided thereunder and therefore, the writ Court adequate remedies have been provided thereunder adequate remedies have been provided thereunder ought not to exercise its writ jurisdiction in matters which ought not to exercise provided writ jurisdiction in matters which have been provided relevant extract is Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The relevant extract is Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for in the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 reproduced hereunder:- reproduced hereunder: “15. Apart from delay and laches, High Court should have noted 15. Apart from delay and laches, High Court should have noted 15. Apart from delay and laches, High Court should have noted 15. Apart from delay and laches, High Court should have noted that Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is a complete code in itself, that Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is a complete code in itself, that Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is a complete code in itself, that Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is a complete code in itself, having sufficient checks and balances, remedial avenues and having sufficient checks and balances, remedial avenues and having sufficient checks and balances, remedial avenues and having sufficient checks and balances, remedial avenues and appeals. Adherence of protocols and procedures maintains legal appeals. Adherence of protocols and procedures maintains legal appeals. Adherence of protocols and procedures maintains legal appeals. Adherence of protocols and procedures maintains legal pline and preserves the balance between the need for order and discipline and preserves the balance between the need for order and pline and preserves the balance between the need for order and disci the quest for justice. The supervisory and judicial review powers the quest for justice. The supervisory and judicial review powers the quest for justice. The supervisory and judicial review powers the quest for justice. The supervisory and judicial review powers vested in High Courts represent critical constitutional safeguards, vested in High Courts represent critical constitutional safeguards, vested in High Courts represent critical constitutional safeguards, vested in High Courts represent critical constitutional safeguards, yet yet yet yet their exercise demands rigorous scrutiny and their exercise demands rigorous scrutiny and their exercise demands rigorous scrutiny and their exercise demands rigorous scrutiny and judicious judicious judicious judicious application. This is certainly not a case for the High Court to application. This is certainly not a case for the High Court to application. This is certainly not a case for the High Court to application. This is certainly not a case for the High Court to interdict CIRP proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy interdict CIRP proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy interdict CIRP proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy interdict CIRP proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.” Code.” 7.
Decision
the In view of the above, we do not find it appropriate to exercise the In view of the above, we do not find it appropriate to exercise In view of the above, we do not find it appropriate to exercise remedy is available to the petitioner. writ jurisdiction as an alternative statutory remedy is available to the petitioner. remedy is available to the petitioner. writ jurisdiction as at liberty to The petition stands dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to The petition stands dismissed. However, the petitioner The petition stands dismissed. However, the petitioner avail alternative remedy in accordance with law. avail alternative remedy in accordance with law. avail alternative remedy in accordance with law. SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.05.29 11:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 3 2025 CWP-14348-2025 8. It is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are only for It is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are only for It is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are only for It is clarified that the observations made hereinabove are only for e are not expressing any opinion on the deciding the instant writ petition. We are not expressing any opinion on the e are not expressing any opinion on the deciding the instant writ petition. merits of the matter. This order shall have no bearing on adjudication by the merits of the matter. This order shall have no bearing on adjudication by the merits of the matter. This order shall have no bearing on adjudication by the merits of the matter. This order shall have no bearing on adjudication by the competent Court/Tribunal/Appellate Tribunal. competent Court/Tribunal (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) (ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL) JUDGE (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) (DEEPAK MANCHANDA) JUDGE 19.05.2025 SwarnjitS Whether speaking/reasoned Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Whether reportable : : Yes / No Yes / No Yes / No Yes / No SWARNJIT SINGH 2025.05.29 11:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 4