- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
The Supreme Court on Monday allowed for the transfer of a petition challenging the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) Ordinance pending before the High Court to itself. (KIC Food Products Pvt Ltd. vs Union of India)
The petitioner had moved a transfer petition before the Supreme Court on the grounds that the Apex Court was already seized of a similar matter and had issued notice on the same in the case of Manish Kumar vs Union of India.
The petitioner had challenged the validity of Section 3 the IBC Ordinance which is vitally the main issue before the Apex Court in Manish Kumar and similar petitions as well. Owing to the same, the petitioner sought for the challenge to the Ordinance to be heard by the Supreme Court along with similar petitions and for the same to be transferred from the Delhi High Court.
The petitioner humbly submits that the same or substantially the same questions of law, relating to the constitutional validity of the S. 3 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Amendment), 2019 Ordinance, are pending adjudication before this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(C) No. 26 of 2020 and other batch of matters.
The Transfer petition states
Therefore, in light of this fact, the petitioner has invoked Article 139 of the Constitution of India and sought for the case to be transferred before the Supreme Court.
The Bench of Justices Rohinton Nariman and Ravindra Bhat, therefore, on Monday allowed the transfer plea and the pending petition filed by KIC Food Pvt Ltd now stands transferred from Delhi High Court to the Supreme Court.
In January this year, the Supreme Court Bench headed by Justice Nariman had issued notice on a batch of petitions that challenged the validity of he IBC Ordinance in so far as it amended Section 7 of the Code for homebuyers. While issuing notice on the same, the Apex Court had also directed for status quo to be maintained.
The Ordinance, which was promulgated on December 28, 2019, had introduced a minimum threshold of at least 100 allottees of the same real estate project, or 10% of the total allottees under that project, whichever is less, for moving a joint plea seeking initiation of the corporate insolvency resolution process against a real estate developer.
[Read the Order]