The Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) in its order dated October 15, 2019 in respect of proceedings against Emgee Cables & Communications Limited (“ECC”) (Adjudication Order Ref No.: ORDER/SS/SK/2019-20/4938) dealt with the issue of whether adjudication proceedings initiated against a company can be proceeded with if a liquidation order has been passed.
Brief Facts:
In the present proceedings, SEBI vide a show cause notice (“SCN”) dated March 2, 2015 alleging that ECC had failed to resolve two complaints pending against them in the SEBI Complaints Redress System (“SCORES”). Out of the two complaints, earlier complaint was pending since 2011. SEBI contended that despite being called upon to do so, ECC failed to resolve those complaints within the time specified by SEBI, thereby rendering ECC liable for imposition of penalty under Section 15A (Penalty for failure to furnish information, return, etc.) and Section 15C (Penalty for failure to redress investors' grievances) of the SEBI Act, 1992. ECC had neither filed any reply nor had availed the opportunity of personal hearing despite service of SCN upon ECC.
During the proceedings, it was observed that an order was passed in the matter of M/s. Packwell (India) Private Limited v. Emgee Cables & Communications Limited (IA No. 117/JPR/2019 in CP (IB) No. 601 (ND)/2018 TA No. 69/2018) by the National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Jaipur Bench on September 18, 2019 vide which a liquidation order was passed against ECC and a liquidator was appointed.
Issue:
Whether the instant adjudication proceedings initiated against ECC can be proceeded with in view of the order passed by the NCLT, Jaipur Bench.
Decision:
While examining the abovementioned issue, the adjudicating officer relied on Section 279 of Companies Act, 2013 (corresponding to Section 446 of the erstwhile Companies Act, 1956) which provides for stay of suits, etc., on winding up order.
“Section 279, Companies Act, 2013: Stay of suits, etc., on winding up order. -
Provided that any application to the Tribunal seeking leave under this section shall be disposed of by the Tribunal within sixty days.
Relying on the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 and the judgment of Bombay High Court in the case of Deutsche Bank v. S.P. Kala, (1990) 67 Comp Cas 474, SEBI observed that it is mandatory to obtain the leave of the NCLT for commencing the instant proceedings against ECC. Further, SEBI held that, in the absence of the leave of NCLT, the present adjudication proceedings cannot be proceeded with.
This update has been contributed by Kartik Jigyasi (Associate).
7A, 7th Floor, Tower C, Max House,
Okhla Industrial Area, Phase 3
New Delhi – 110020
The rules of the Bar Council of India do not permit advocates to solicit work or advertise in any manner. This website has been created only for informational purposes and is not intended to constitute solicitation, invitation, advertisement or inducement of any sort whatsoever from us or any of our members to solicit any work in any manner. By clicking on 'Agree' below, you acknowledge and confirm the following:
a) there has been no solicitation, invitation, advertisement or inducement of any sort whatsoever from us or any of our members to solicit any work through this website;
b) you are desirous of obtaining further information about us on your own accord and for your use;
c) no information or material provided on this website is to be construed as a legal opinion and use of this website will not create any lawyer-client relationship;
d) while reasonable care has been taken in ensuring the accuracy of the contents of the website, Argus Partners shall not be responsible for the results of any actions taken on the basis of information provided in this website or for any error or omission in the website; and
e) in cases where the user has any legal issues, the user must seek independent legal advice.