Supreme Court of India
Digital Supreme Court Reports
The Official Law Report Fortnightly ISSN: 3048-4839 (Online)
Home
Full Text

RAMESH KYMAL vs. M/S SIEMENS GAMESA RENEWABLE POWER PVT. LTD.

SCR Citation: [2021] 3 S.C.R. 983
Year/Volume: 2021/ Volume 3
Date of Judgment: 09 February 2021
Petitioner: RAMESH KYMAL
Disposal Nature: Appeal Dismissed
Neutral Citation: 2021 INSC 71
Judgment Delivered by: Honble Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud
Respondent: M/S SIEMENS GAMESA RENEWABLE POWER PVT. LTD.
Case Type: CIVIL APPEAL /4050/2020
Order/Judgment: Judgment
1. Headnote

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Embargo in s.10A – Applicability of – Application u/s.9 filed before 05 June 2020, in respect of a default which had occurred after 25 March 2020 – Maintainability of, in view of insertion of s.10A(inserted by Act 17 of 2020) with retrospective effect from 05 June 2020 – Application held not maintainable by NCLT – Decision affirmed by NCLAT – On appeal, held: Language of the provision is not always decisive of its prospective or retrospective application rather its object must also be taken into account – Expression “from such date” in s.10A evidently refers to 25 March 2020 which was consciously provided by the legislature since it coincides with the date on which the national lockdown was declared due to the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic – Substantive part of s.10A is to be construed harmoniously with the first proviso and the explanation – Expression “shall ever be filed” in the proviso is a clear indicator that the intent of the legislature is to bar the institution of any application for the commencement of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) in respect of a default which has occurred on or after 25 March 2020 for a period of six months, extendable up to one year as notified – Conclusion of NCLAT affirmed – Interpretation of Statutes – Harmonious, Purposive Construction. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – s.10A – Object of – Discussed. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – ss.5(11), (12), 7(6), 8, 9(6), 10(5) – Difference between “initiation date” and “insolvency commencement date” – Discussed. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – ss.8(1), 9 – Date of default –Attempt to set back the date of default from 30 April 2020 to either 21 January 2020 or 23 March 2020 Held: Untenable, as it is contrary to the disclosure made by the appellant in the demand notice issued in pursuance of the provisions of s.8(1) and s.9 –Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 – r.5. Words & Phrases: “shall be filed” in first proviso to s.10A–Plea of the appellant is that the said expression indicates prospective nature of the provision so as to apply only to the applications filed after 05 June 2020, the date on which the provision was inserted– Held: Rejected– Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – s.10A.“from such date” in s.10A –Intention of Legislature – Discussed – Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – s.10A.

2. Case referred
3. Act
      No Data Found!!!!!
4. Keyword
  • Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
  • 2016
5. Equivalent citation
    Citation(s) 2021 AIR 833 = 2021 (3) SCC 224 = 2021 (3) Suppl. SCC 224 = 2021 (2) JT 589 = 2021 (2) Suppl. JT 589 = 2021 (2) SCALE 458