"The term 'Adjudicating Authority', as defined in Section 5(1) of IBC cannot come within the ambit of court as defined in Section 2(29) of the Companies Act, 2023." Discuss the statement with relevant case law.

In the case of Vijay Pal Garg and Others Vs. Pooja Bahrey as decided by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), New Delhi, it was observed that: The term Adjudicating Authority, as defined in Section 5(1) of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) cannot come within the ambit of court as defined in Section 2(29) of the Companies Act, 2013. In fact, Section 2(29) (i) of the Companies Act defines 'Court' the High Court having jurisdiction in relation to the place at which the registered office of the Company concerned is situated etc. Section 2(29) (ii) of the Act speaks of 'District Court' and Section 29 (iii) deals with the Court of Session, Section 29 (iv) pertains to the Special Court constituted under section 435 and Section 29(5) is concerned with any Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate of the 1st Class. Likewise, the term Tribunal is defined under section 2(90) of the Companies Act which means the NCLT constituted under Section 408 of the Companies Act, 2013. It is significant to point out that a court of Law exercises judicial power in discharging judicial function and finally arrive at a conclusion. A 'Tribunal' is similar to a 'Court' but it is not a 'Court'. In short, the 'Court' means a 'Court' of civil judicature and the 'Tribunal' means body of men appointed to decide the disputes /controversies (of course judicial power of the state being conferred in it). The procedure of a 'Court of Law' and 'Tribunal' will differ but they function in their own field. However, a 'court of Law' and the 'Tribunal' act judicially in both senses. To put it lucidly, a Tribunal does not have the trappings of a 'court'. Thus, keeping in mind a prime fact that the Tribunal/Adjudicating Authority is guided by the Principles of Natural justice and is to follow the procedure prescribed under section 213(b) of the Companies Act, 2013 comes to an 'irresistible' and inescapable conclusion that the Adjudicating Authorities (Tribunal) in law is not empowered to order an investigation directly to be carried out by the Central Government. It was observed that an Adjudicating Authority (Tribunal), as a competent / appropriate authority in terms of Section 213 of the Companies Act, 2013 has an option to issue notice in regard to the charges/allegations levelled against the promoters and others (including the Appellants) of course after following the due procedure enshrined under Section 213 of the Companies Act, 2013. In case, an ex facie / prima facie case is made out, then, the Tribunal is empowered to refer the matter to the Central Government for an investigation by the inspectors and upon such investigation, if any action is required to be taken and if the Central Government subjectively opines that the subject matter in issue needs an investigation, through the Serious Fraud Investigation Office, it may proceed in accordance with the law.