9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 1032 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyDirections of this Tribunal complied by the Respondents or not - Applicant submitted that the Respondents/Corporate Debtor has not handed over the books and records to the Applicant - HELD THAT - It is seen that the documents in relation to the Corporate Debtor had already been handed over to the Applicant and the documents in relation to the Guduvancherry and Thiruvallur property belongs to 1st and 2nd Respondents. Further, it is averred that the documents relating to company affairs before the month of November 2015 were destroyed in the flood which happened during the year 2015. The Respondents are directed to extend full co-operation to the Liquidator in case of any documents are being sought for in future, for completion of the Liquidation process in relation to the Corporate Debtor - application disposed off.
Issues:
Liquidator seeking compliance with tribunal orders and direction under Companies Act, 2013. Comprehensive Analysis: Issue 1: Compliance with Tribunal Orders The Liquidator of M/s. RRP Housing Private Limited filed an application seeking compliance with tribunal orders under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Liquidator was appointed following the Corporate Debtor's liquidation order by the Tribunal. The Respondents, however, failed to hand over the books and records to the Liquidator, leading to the Liquidator securing the documents with the permission of CMDA authorities. Upon analysis, it was discovered that properties were standing in the name of the Corporate Debtor, with significant amounts transferred to personal bank accounts of the Respondents. Despite tribunal directions in previous orders (MA/775/2019 and MA/996/2019) to furnish information and records, the Respondents did not comply, prompting the current application for enforcement. Issue 2: Response and Counter-Arguments In response, the Respondent claimed pending appeal against the liquidation order before NCLAT and asserted ownership of properties in Guduvancherry and Thiruvallur. The Respondent alleged unauthorized communication from the Liquidator to DTCP affecting project approvals. They contended that documents were handed over to the Liquidator, except for the Maraimalai Nagar property title deed, deposited with financiers. The Respondent argued that pre-November 2015 documents were lost in a flood, and no operations occurred post the Respondent's arrest in January 2016. Judgment and Direction After considering submissions from both parties, the Tribunal found that documents related to the Corporate Debtor had been handed over to the Liquidator, except for Guduvancherry and Thiruvallur properties owned by the Respondents. Noting the circumstances of the flood-related document loss, the Tribunal directed the Respondents to cooperate fully with the Liquidator for any future document requests to facilitate the liquidation process effectively. Consequently, the Tribunal disposed of the application (IA/246/IB/2020) with the specified directions for compliance and cooperation. This detailed analysis encapsulates the key issues, arguments, and the Tribunal's directives outlined in the legal judgment concerning the Liquidator's application for compliance with tribunal orders and the direction under the Companies Act, 2013.
|
