Case Title: Ashish Chandravandan Patel v. Axis Bank Ltd. & Anr.
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Ms. Shreesha Merla, and Shri. Naresh Salecha, while adjudicating an appeal in this case has held that a fresh hearing cannot be instituted on the ground of temporary unavailability of a member to sign the order.
The present case was instituted against an order dated April 27, 2022, through which an application was admitted under Section 7 of the Code. The counsel on behalf of the appellant challenged the order on the ground that it was not in compliance with Rules 151 and 152 of the NCLT Rules. The counsel further submitted that there are no signatures of the technical member and, according to rule 152 of the NCLT Rules, the approval of the President is required for the same. Further, it was submitted by the appellant that in the above-mentioned scenario, the order should not have been released part-heard and should have been kept for a fresh hearing.
The NCLAT observed that the order appended to the judgement recorded that the technical member would not be available for another couple of weeks, and hence, orders are announced invoking Rule 151 of the NCLT Rules, 2016.
The NCLAT further opined that there is no error in invoking Rule 151 of the NCLT Rules for the pronouncement of an order by one member with the consent of the other member of the bench.
The Appellate Tribunal further observed that in the present case, Rule 152(4) of the IBC regulations cannot be invoked as there has been no death, retirement, or resignation of the technical member. In the present case, only the technical member was unavailable for a couple of weeks, and the order was signed with his consent.
The NCLAT held that Rule 152(4) cannot be applied in the present occasion and further held that there is clear debt and default, which cannot be questioned under Section 7 of the application, and hence, the appeal is dismissed.