The High Court of Madras Bench comprising of Justice T. Raja and Justice K. Kumaresh Babu, while adjudicating a writ petition filed in Sunku Vasundhara v State Bank of India, has held that when an effective and statutory remedy lies before the Appellate Authority i.e. National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), aggrieved parties cannot invoke Article 226 of the Constitution of India for relief. The order was passed on 15.06.2022.
The Petitioner had filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Madras, seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorari against an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal ("NCLT"), Chennai Bench on 29.04.2022. The NCLT Bench through the impugned order had directed the Resolution Professional to file an Interim Application under Section 106 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 on or before 29.06.2022.
Decision Of The High Court
The High Court held that the Petitioner has an effective and statutory remedy before the Appellate Authority i.e. National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) and thus Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked. An appeal should have been filed before the NCLAT and not the High Court.
The Bench dismissed the writ petition and granted liberty to the Petitioner to raise its plea before the NCLAT.
Case Title: Sunku Vasundhara v State Bank of India, W.P.Nos.14398 of 2022
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 274
Counsel For Petitioners: Mr.Vineet Subramanian for M/s.Vivrti Law
Counsel For respondents: Mr.K.Chandrasekaran, SBI (Panel) for R1