The Tribunal dismissed a Section 9 petition filed by an operational creditor against a corporate debtor, holding the petition infructuous as the debtor was already undergoing CIRP in a separate admission order.
Petition dismissed as infructuous; operational creditor directed to file claim with the IRP appointed in the existing CIRP.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH
COURT – IV
C.P.(IB)/389(MB)/2021
CORAM:
SHRI MANOJ KUMAR DUBEY SHRI KISHORE VEMULAPALLI MEMBER (Technical) MEMBER (Judicial)
ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING HELD ON 08.07.2022
NAME OF THE PARTIES:
Antelec Limited
Vs
Rajesh Business & Leisure Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
SECTION: 9 OF INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016.
O R D E R
The Court is convened through Video Conference.
Sd/- Sd/- MANOJ KUMAR DUBEY KISHORE VEMULAPALLI Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)
08.07.2022 / pvs
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition under Section 9 of the IBC is maintainable when the corporate debtor is already under Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiated in a separate admission order.
Whether the present petition is rendered infructuous due to the pendency of another CIRP regarding the same corporate debtor.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Antelec Limited
Rajesh Business & Leisure Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
Manoj Kumar Dubey
Kishore Vemulapalli
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
