Review Plea Challenging Validity of Reg. 23a of IBBI Norms Dismissed as It Was Nothing but an Appeal in Disguise | HC

Case Detail: V.Venkata Sivakumar v. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) - [2024] 160 taxmann.com 755 (HC - Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Sanjay V. Gangapurwala, CJ. & D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.
• V. Venkata Sivakumar for the Applicant.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Regulation 23A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) Regulations, which was subsequently amended by the IBBI vide Notification No. IBBI/2016-17/GN/REG0001, dated 23.07.2019 as ultra vires the constitution.

Consequently, the petitioner directed the respondent to pay compensation for the financial loss and mental agony suffered by him. However, the said writ petition was dismissed by the High Court.

The petitioner filed an instant review application on the ground that the High Court had not considered arguments relating to the principles of natural justice in a proper perspective and, thus, the order under review suffered from an error on the face of the record.

It was noted that the petitioner’s submissions were nothing but pointing out that the conclusions reached by the High Court were erroneous, and he was virtually assailing the correctness of the findings before the same Court and pleading for reconsideration of the issue, which was nothing but an appeal in disguise.

High Court Held

The High Court held that since there was no other sufficient cause which would be within the contours of review as contemplated under Order XXVII Rule 1 of CPC, the instant review application couldn’t be entertained. Therefore, the same was to be dismissed.