021 (1 ) CCC 146 (SC ), [2021 ]225 CompCas520 (SC ), (2021 )2 CompLJ572 (SC ), 2021 INSC 71 , (2021 )3 SCC224 , 2022 (2 ) SCJ 444 , [2021 ]164 SCL455 (SC ), [2021 ]3 SCR983 , ,MANU/SC/0061/2021D.Y. Chandrachud#M.R. Shah#249SC3020Judgment/OrderAIR#BLJ#CCC#CompCas#CompLJ#INSC#MANU#SCC#SCJ#SCL#SCRD.Y. Chandrachud,Power and Energy#Power and EnergySUPREME COURT OF INDIA2021-2-10692447,864173,692390,692388,692391,692389,692385,16910 -->

MANU/SC/0061/2021

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 4050 of 2020

Decided On: 09.02.2021

Appellants: Ramesh Kymal Vs. Respondent: Siemens Gamesa Renewable Power Pvt. Ltd.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud and M.R. Shah

JUDGMENT

Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.

1. The appellate jurisdiction of this Court Under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ("IBC") has been invoked to challenge the judgment and order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT or Appellate Tribunal") dated 19 October 2020. The NCLAT affirmed the decision of the National Company Law Tribunal ("NCLT" or "Adjudication Authority") dated 9 July 2020, holding that in view of the provisions of Section 10A, which have been inserted by Act 17 of 2020 (the "Amending Act") with retrospective effect from 5 June 2020, the application filed by the Appellant as an operational creditor Under Section 9 was not maintainable.

2. Some of the salient facts set out in the appeal are being adverted to in order to indicate the broad contours of the controversy. The issue involved raises a question of law. Hence, while setting out the facts as set up in the appeal, we need to clarify that the factual dispute has not arisen for adjudication.

3. The Appellant claims that a sum of INR 104,11,76,479 is due and payable to him pursuant to his resignation "from all capacities held by him in the Respondent in accordance with the various Employment Agreements/Incentive Agreements" entered into by him with the Respondent during his tenure as Chairman and Managing Director. The Appellant entered into an Employment Agreement with the Respondent on 16 July 2009. Another Employment Agreement was entered into on 16 December 2013, effective from 1 January 2014, which superseded the previous agreement. The Employment Agreement dated 16 December 2013 was coupled with an Incentive Agreement signed on the same date. The Incentive Agreement is stated to have been amended and restated on 17 April 2015, along with a further amendment through a Side Letter dated 20 April 2015. Further, the new Employment Agreement was amended through a Letter Amendment No. 1 dated 17 April 2015.

4. On 21 January 2020, the Appellant submitted his resignation to the Respondent and its parent entity, detailing the entitlements which he claimed under the Employment and Incentive Agreements. On 28 January 2020, the Respondent acknowledged receipt of the letter of resignation and requested the Appellant to continue in employment beyond the 60 days' notice period stipulated in the Employment Agreement. According to the Appellant, he agreed to cont........