9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 589 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcySeeking release of attachment made on scheduled mentioned property - seeking restriction from taking any further act of recovery proceedings against the Schedule mentioned Property purchased by the Applicant - seeking restraint from causing any hurdle for the functioning of the factory at the schedule mentioned property - seeking direction to 1st respondent to handover the Schedule mentioned property encumbrance free to the Applicant - HELD THAT - It can be seen from the letters dated 24.12.2020 and 10.02.2021, exchanged between the 5th and 6th Respondents in IA/1005/2021, that the claim raised in the de facto attachment was occurred in the period between July 2011 and March 2014. Whereas, the Corporate Debtor was admitted into CIRP on 01.09.2017, in furtherance to that Liquidation was ordered on 16.07.2018, the paper publication regarding Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor was published on 18.07.2018, it is pertinent to note that no claim has been submitted by the Respondents 2 to 5 in IA/1005/2021, before the Resolution Professional or the Liquidator during the CIRP and the Liquidation process. This Adjudicating Authority is of the considered opinion that the Sub Registrar of Uthumalai's demand of No Objection Certificate from the Tahsildar, Veerakeralampudur for registering the sale deed dated 12.02.2021 entered into between Sri Gomathi Energy (P) Ltd. and the Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor, reasoning alleged de facto attachment made on the Property is unjustifiable at this stage of Liquidation. Moreover, the Property sold to the Sri Gomathi Energy (P) Ltd. was in accordance with the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Sub Registrar, Uthumalai is directed to register the sale deed dated 12.02.2021 entered between Sri Gomathi Energy (P) Ltd. and the Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor - the liability in respect of the Property is not extinguished - Application disposed off.
Issues Involved:
1. Attachment and encumbrance on the property purchased by the applicant. 2. Registration of the sale deed. 3. Liability for dues of the erstwhile owner. 4. Extension of the liquidation period. Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Attachment and Encumbrance on the Property: The applicant, Sri Gomathi Energy (P) Ltd., sought relief to direct the respondents to raise the attachment on the property purchased from the liquidator of the Corporate Debtor, Auro Mira Biopower India Limited. The application contended that the attachment made by the 5th respondent was not reflected in the encumbrance certificate issued by the 6th respondent. It was argued that the 1st respondent suppressed the fact of existing charges on the properties. The 2nd respondent clarified that no attachment was made by them on the property and emphasized that the dues payable were statutory under the Electricity Act, 2003, and thus recoverable under the applicable supply code. 2. Registration of the Sale Deed: The liquidator filed an application seeking direction for the registration of the sale deed executed between the Corporate Debtor and the applicant. The sale deed was lodged with the 3rd respondent, who refused registration, citing the need for a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the 2nd respondent due to alleged tax arrears. The tribunal noted that the attachment claimed by the respondents occurred after the liquidation order and was not reflected in the encumbrance certificate. The tribunal directed the Sub Registrar, Uthumalai, to register the sale deed, stating that the de facto attachment was unjustifiable at this stage of liquidation. 3. Liability for Dues of the Erstwhile Owner: The tribunal highlighted the principle of "caveat emptor" (buyer beware), noting that the sale was executed on an "As is where is, whatever there is" basis. The tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Telangana State Southern Power Distribution Company Limited & Anr Vs. Srigdhaa Beverages, which established that electricity dues, being statutory, cannot be waived and must be borne by the purchaser if mentioned in the sale terms. The tribunal clarified that the liability concerning the property was not extinguished and the purchaser must bear any dues of the erstwhile owner. 4. Extension of the Liquidation Period: The liquidator sought an extension of the liquidation period for three months to complete the sale transaction. However, this application was deemed infructuous and closed as the period had already lapsed. Conclusion: The tribunal directed the Sub Registrar, Uthumalai, to register the sale deed dated 12.02.2021 between Sri Gomathi Energy (P) Ltd. and the liquidator of the Corporate Debtor. It was clarified that the liability in respect of the property was not extinguished, and the purchaser must bear the cost of any dues of the erstwhile owner. The applications IA(IBC)/1005/CHE/2021, IA/241(CHE)/2021, and IA/1337/IB/2021 were disposed of with these observations.
|
