Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 20 (0.27 seconds)Section 9 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Article 137 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Limitation Act, 1963
A. Navinchandra Steels Pvt. Ltd. vs Srei Equipment Finance Limited on 1 March, 2021
29. Dr Singhvi and Shri Ranjit Kumar have vehemently
argued that SREI has suppressed the winding-up
proceeding in its application under Section 7 IBC before
NCLT and has resorted to Section 7 only as a subterfuge
to avoid moving a transfer application before the High
Court in the pending winding-up proceeding. These
arguments do not avail the appellant for the simple
reason that Section 7 is an independent proceeding, as
has been held in a catena of judgments of this Court,
which has to be tried on its own merits. Any
"suppression" of the winding-up proceeding would,
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 320 of 2022 30
therefore, not be of any effect in deciding a Section 7
petition on the basis of the provisions contained in the
IBC. Equally, it cannot be said that any subterfuge has
been availed of for the same reason that Section 7 is an
independent proceeding that stands by itself. As has
been correctly pointed out by Shri Sinha, a discretionary
jurisdiction under the fifth proviso to Section 434(1)(c) of
the Companies Act, 2013 cannot prevail over the
undoubted jurisdiction of NCLT under the IBC once the
parameters of Section 7 and other provisions of the IBC
have been met. For all these reasons, therefore, the
appeal is dismissed and the interim order that has been
passed by this Court on 18-12-2020 [A. Navinchandra
Steels (P) Ltd. v. Srei Equipment Finance Ltd., 2020
SCC OnLine SC 1141] shall stand immediately vacated."