9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 810 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcySeeking direction upon Respondent No. 1 to hand over the possession of Birpara Tea Estate (Tea Estate) to the Resolution Professional - HELD THAT - Similar applications have now been filed by the Resolution Professional for possession of Tea Estates. The only concern is that the Corporate Debtor is in financial stress and whether the Resolution Professional would be able to run these Tea Estates. The lease given to the Corporate Debtor has not been renewed in favour of the Corporate Debtor hence; it is out of question that the Resolution Professional can take possession of the Tea Gardens to which the Corporate Debtor has no ownership. Application dismissed.
Issues:
Resolution Professional seeking possession of Tea Estate from Respondent No. 1. Analysis: The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) initiated against the Corporate Debtor led to the Resolution Professional's appointment. The Tea Estate was leased to the Corporate Debtor by the State of West Bengal. A notification by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry recommended the Tea Board take control over the Tea Gardens. The Respondent challenged the notification in court. The Resolution Professional sought details of the Tea Estate and discovered it was managed by workers and a Trade Union, not a Manager. The Committee of Creditors learned that the Tea Estate would resume operations under Respondent No. 1. The Respondent filed applications for handing over the Tea Estate. The Applicant sought intervention from the District Magistrate. The main issue was whether the Tea Estate constituted an "asset" of the Corporate Debtor under Section 18(f) of the Code. The Respondent argued that the Tea Estate was not an asset as the lease had expired, and they were operating as a licensee of the State of West Bengal. The Respondent took possession of the Tea Garden after the Corporate Debtor abandoned it. The Adjudicating Authority had previously decided similar cases regarding possession of Tea Estates. The Resolution Professional was not entitled to interfere with the management of the Tea Garden by the Respondent. The books and records maintained by the Respondent were not obligated to be handed over to the Applicant. The Tribunal dismissed the Resolution Professional's application, citing that the lease to the Corporate Debtor had not been renewed, making it impossible for the Resolution Professional to take possession of the Tea Gardens. The order was pronounced on May 9, 2022, granting liberty to apply if the Government of West Bengal decided on the lease renewal. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the application, emphasizing that the Resolution Professional lacked ownership rights over the Tea Estate due to the expired lease. The decision was based on previous rulings and the absence of legal grounds for the Resolution Professional to claim possession of the Tea Gardens.
|
