SREI INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE LTD Vs. ASSAM COMPANY INDIA LTD
LAWS(NCLT)-2017-10-178
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Decided on October 13,2017

Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd Appellant
VERSUS
ASSAM COMPANY INDIA LTD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

P K Saikia, Member - (1.) Mr. R.N. Ghosh & Mr. R. Sarmah, learned Advocates are present on behalf of the applicant/Financial Creditor. Mr. A. Gaggar & Mr. D. Choudhury, learned Advocates are also present representing the respondent/Corporate Debtor.
(2.) This Tribunal, on the last occasion, i.e. 15.09.2017, on hearing both the parties having regard to the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Sree Metaliks Limited & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors, 2017 203 CompCas 442 (Cal) as well as the decision of the Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in the case of M/s. Starlog Enterprises Limited Vs. ICICI Bank Limited, Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.5 of 2017, was pleased to direct the respondent/Corporate Debtor to file reply to the petition under Section 7 of the Code of 2016 read with Rule 4 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules 2016 with further direction to supply simultaneously copies thereof to the applicant for filing of rejoinder, if any, by the applicant. For ready reference, the direction rendered by this Tribunal in its order dated 15.09.2017 is reproduced below: "On hearing the parties having regard to the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in Sree Metaliks Limited as well as the decision ofNCLATin M/s. Starlog Enterprises Limited , I am of the opinion that the Corporate Debtor is required to be given an opportunity to file written objection against the initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process within a period of 7 days from today supplying simultaneously copy thereof to the applicant. "On receipt of the reply, the Financial Creditor may, if so advised, file rejoinder thereto supplying simultaneously copy thereof to the Corporate Debtor."
(3.) The learned counsel for the parties submit that as required they have exchanged their pleadings in the meantime. Mr. A. Gaggar, learned Advocate for the respondent, submits that the leading Advocate for the respondent in this proceeding, namely, Mr. A. Mitra, Sr. Advocate could not be present before this Bench today since he is out of the country.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.