Volkswagen Finance Private Limited (S) v. Shree Balaji Printopack Pvt. Ltd. And Another (S).

Factual and Procedural Background

The matter is an appeal in which the Court heard counsel for the appellant and for the first respondent. The appellant’s counsel undertook to serve a copy of the paper book on the first respondent’s counsel.

According to the submissions recorded, the controversy involves a security interest created by a hypothecation agreement over a vehicle to secure a loan of Rs. 36 lakhs advanced to a corporate debtor. The charge is stated to have been registered under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and endorsed on the certificate of registration. It is further stated that the charge is recognized under Section 77(3) and (4) of the Companies Act 2013. The appellant contends that the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal has erroneously interpreted Section 52(3) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 (IBC) and Regulation 21 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations 2016.

Procedurally, the Court issued notice returnable on 8 February 2021. A counter affidavit was directed to be filed in the meantime. The Court also directed learned counsel for the contesting parties to file brief written submissions at least one week before the next date of listing to facilitate the final disposal of the appeal.

Legal Issues Presented

The opinion addresses a procedural matter and does not frame distinct legal issues.

Arguments of the Parties

Appellant's Arguments

• On the basis of Sections 3(30) and 3(31) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, the appellant asserts the existence of a security interest created through a hypothecation agreement over a vehicle for a loan of Rs. 36 lakhs advanced to the corporate debtor.
• The charge is registered under the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 and endorsed on the certificate of registration.
• The charge is recognized by Section 77(3) and (4) of the Companies Act 2013.
• The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal has erroneously interpreted Section 52(3) of the IBC and Regulation 21 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations 2016.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The order is procedural. After hearing counsel for both sides and noting the appellant’s submissions and the undertaking to serve the paper book on the first respondent, the Court did not enter into the merits of the appeal. Instead, it directed the standard next steps to ensure a fair and orderly adjudication: issuance of notice, filing of a counter affidavit by the respondent, and submission of brief written arguments by the contesting parties ahead of the next listing. These directions indicate the Court’s intention to consider the matter for final disposal after receiving the parties’ written materials.

Holding and Implications

NOTICE ISSUED; the Court directed that a counter affidavit be filed in the meantime and required the contesting parties to file brief written submissions at least one week before the next listing date (8 February 2021).

Implications: The appeal remains pending and has not been decided on merits. The immediate effect is to set a schedule for responsive pleadings and written submissions to facilitate final disposal. No broader legal precedent or interpretation was established by this order.