Ancy Mol vs Union Bank Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 21692 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 21692 Ker
Judgement Date : 2 November, 2021

Kerala High Court

Ancy Mol vs Union Bank Of India on 2 November, 2021

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021/11TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 23943 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:

    1    ANCY MOL, MURICKOLLI HOUSE,
         NADACKA (P.O.), ERATTUPETTA VILLAGE,
         KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 124.

    2    AMINA S., MURICKOLLI HOUSE,
         NADACKA (P.O.), ERATTUPETTA VILLAGE,
         KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 124.

         BY ADV S.EASWARAN
RESPONDENTS:

    1    UNION BANK OF INDIA, ERATTUPETTA BRANCH,
         1ST FLOOR, PARAANAL ARCADE, ARUVITHARA,
         SD MEENACHIL, ERATTUPETTA P.O.,
         KOTTAYAM - 686 121
         REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.

    2    C.A. MAHALINGAM SURESH KUMAR,
         LIQUIDATOR OF M/S. RAIHAN HEALTH CARE
         PRIVATE LIMITED, M/S. SPP & CO.,
         CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, NO. 27/9,
         NIVEDH VIKAS, PANKAJA MILL ROAD,
         PUIYAKULAM, COIMBATORE - 641 045.

    3    THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL,
         COMPANY LAW BHAVAN, KAKKANAD,
         KOCHI - 682030, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.

         BY ADV MANOJ RAMASWAMY (APPEARS FOR R1)
         SRI.A.G.SATHYANARAYANA (APPEARS FOR R2)

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 02.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C)No.23943/2021

                               2




                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2021

The petitioners are before this Court seeking to restore

Ext.P1 application and proceed accordingly on merits of the

case. The petitioners also seek an interim prayer to stay all

further proceedings in IBA 240/IB/2019 on the files of NCLT

Kochi.

2. The petitioners submit that Ext.P1 application

under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code,

2016 filed by the petitioners was pending with the Company

Law Tribunal. In the meanwhile, pursuant to Ext.P4

judgment of this Court, NCLT impleaded the petitioners as

additional respondents in Ext.P3 application. But at the

same time, without any reason, Ext.P1 application submitted

by the petitioners was rejected on 29.09.2021. WP(C)No.23943/2021

3. The petitioners would submit that by Ext.P1

application, the petitioners prayed that certain properties

belonging to them may be excluded from the proceedings

under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. By not passing

any orders on merit in the said Ext.P1 application, the NCLT

has committed grave illegality and the petitioners have been

put to grave injury. Now the main case is posted to

08.11.2021. Unless an order is passed directing the NCLT

to reconsider Ext.P1 application, the petitioners will be put to

untold hardship and irreparable injury.

4. I have heard Sri. S.Easwaran, the learned

counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel for

the 1st respondent, Sri. A.G. Satyanarayan appearing for the

2nd respondent and the Assistant Solicitor General of India,

Sri. P. Vijayakumar representing the 3rd respondent.

5. Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Code, 2016 provide effective alternative remedy to the WP(C)No.23943/2021

petitioners to file an appeal against Ext.P7 order. Therefore,

I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition. The learned

Counsel for the petitioners would strongly urge that if Ext.P3

application is heard finally on 08.11.2021, the entire efforts

taken by the petitioners would be waste and the petitioners

will be put to irreparable injury and therefore the NCLT is to

be directed to defer the hearing of Ext.P3 for a period of two

weeks.

I find that Ext.P7 order was passed on 29.09.2021 and

this writ petition was filed only on 29.10.2021. In such

circumstances, I am not inclined to grant any relief to the

petitioners for deferring the hearing of Ext.P3 proceedings.

The writ petition is hence dismissed, however permitting the

petitioners to approach NCLAT if the petitioners are so

advised. If the petitioners file an appeal before the NCLAT,

this Court is of the view that taking into consideration the

consider the same with due expedition and in accordance

with law.

Sd/-

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23943/2021

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO.63 OF 2020 IN IBA 240/2019 FILED BEFORE THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL KOCHI ALONG WITH ANNEXURE, Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3           COPY OF MA NO. 7 6OF 2020 IN IBA 2240
                     OF 2019 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
                     BEFORE    THE   NATIONAL  COMPANY    LAW
                     TRIBUNAL KOCHI.
Exhibit P4           COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.04.2021
                     IN WP 4672 OF 2021 ON THE FILES OF
                     THIS HON'BLE COURT.
Exhibit P5           COPY OF THE IA 138 OF 2021 IN MA

76/2020 IN IBA 240/2019 ON THE FILES OF THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL ALONG WITH ANNEXURES, Exhibit P6 COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN IA 138/KOB/2021 IN MA 76/KOB/2020 IN MD 761/KOB /2020 IN IBA 240/IB/2019.

Exhibit P7 COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 29.09.2021 OF THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL KOCHI IN IA 63/KOB OF 2020 IN IBA 240 OF 2019 CB.