Madras HC Rejects PIL Seeking Increase in Sports Quota in Higher Educational Institutions  ||  Kerala HC Directs Kollam Police to Probe Alleged Forgery of NEET Score Card of Candidate  ||  Chotta Rajan-Netflix Row: Bombay HC Refuses to Direct Netflix to Take Down 'Scoop' Web Series  ||  Mad. HC Stays Press Release Inviting Suggestions on Bill as Centre Fails to Provide Translated Copy  ||  Ker. HC: Unexplained Delay in Issuing Detention Order is Ground for Quashing  ||  Maserati Car Import Case: Mad. HC Restrains Tax Dept. from Demanding Penalty From Harris Jayaraj  ||  Delhi HC: Standing Orders on Sampling of Narcotic Drugs Must be Followed by Probe Agencies  ||  Kerala HC Raps Kochi Corp. for Inaction Against Food Stalls Disposing Waste Into Stormwater Canals  ||  Delhi HC: Not Appropriate For Courts to Draw Conclusions at Stage of Bail  ||  All. HC Refuses Bail Stating that it is Unusual for Woman to Present False Story of Sexual Assault    

Balaji Enterprise vs. Gammon India Limited And Ors. - (NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) (21 Feb 2023)

In the absence of a provision of review in the IBC, inherent powers provided under Rule 11 of the NCLAT Rules cannot be invoked for the purpose of filing a Review Application



The Appellant/Applicant filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) against the Respondent for initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process ('CIRP') before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Mumbai). The Applicant/Appellant has filed present Review Application, invoking Rule 11 of the NCLAT, Rules, 2016 read with Section 420(2) of the Companies Act, 2013.

Section 420(2) of Act pertains to the power of the Tribunal for rectification of the mistakes that too if the order passed by the Tribunal is not further appealed. Therefore, this provision is not applicable to the present case and does not create a right of review in any manner. In the absence of a provision of review in the Code, which is complete in itself, inherent powers provided under Rule 11 of the Rules cannot be invoked for the purpose of filing a Review Application.

In the case of Grindlays Bank Ltd. Vs. Central Government Industrial Tribunal & Ors., it has been held by the Supreme Court that the power of review is not an inherent power, it must be conferred either specifically or by necessary implication. Thus, the Review Application is not maintainable from any angle, it may be seen and is in fact an abuse of the process of law, therefore, the Applicant deserves to be saddled with cost of this litigation. Therefore, the Review Application is dismissed.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2023 - All Rights Reserved