TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the basic tenets of law of contract and performance of a contract. The respondent must pay as per the original bid of Rs. 75 Crores, failing which the original bid fails. Thus, there is no requirement for him to match the revised bid of H-2 Bidder as the original bid is now closed. The respondent is, however, directed to deposit the performance guarantee within a period of one month from the date of this order and the same should be to the satisfaction of the CoC. In the event of the failure of the respondent to comply with the conditions of the performance guarantee, the CoC is directed to first negotiate with the H-2 Bidder to explore the possibility of the resolution in a time-bound manner - Application disposed off. Rejection of Resolution Plan - HELD THAT:- This application is closely linked with the IA No. 716/2020 in the sense that the present applicant was the H-2 Bidder in the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor i.e. International Mega Food Park Limited. In the present application, the applicant has made several allegations regarding the way CIRP proceedings was conducted and the respondent No. 3 - Ajay Yadav and Lata Yadav were declared H-1 Bidder over and above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of CoC i.e. on or before 21.03.2020, failing which his right to file reply may be struck off. (6) to pass such further or other orders as may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. As mentioned in the application, the CIRP was admitted by this Adjudicating Authority by order dated 28.02.2019 in CP (IB) No. 174/Chd/CHD/2018. In the course of the said proceedings, the Committee of creditors declared the respondent as H-1 bidder and approved the resolution plan submitted by him in the 23rd meeting of CoC held on 25.02.2020. 4. That as per the terms of the approved resolution plan, the respondent was under obligation to deposit Performance security equal to 10% of the bid amount within 15 days of the date of approval of the resolution plan by CoC i.e. on or before 21.03.2020 in the following manner: (a) Rs. 1.00 crore as cash deposit by way of demand draft in favour of corporate debtor within 15 days from the date of approval of the resolution plan by CoC; and (b) Pledge of properties equivalent to Rs. 14.00 Crores (Rs. Fourteen Crores) as performance security in 15 days from the date of approval of the resolution plan by CoC. 5. In compliance, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecurity. In this reply, the respondents have also made several allegations regarding the appointment of a lawyer for an evaluation of the title deeds submitted. 8. Subsequently, the applicant has filed written submission by Diary No. 01652/5 dated 14.02.2022 and has highlighted the following issues in the 3 title search reports attached with their additional affidavit (page 31 to 64):- a. Page 31 is the title search report of title deed no. 6294 dated 09.02.1995 (Page 34) registered in the name of Sun Star Overseas reports at page 40 The said property can be taken as security by way of equitable mortgage by deposit of title deed . Remarks at the bottom of page 40 Lien Mark in favour of Bank be obtained before disbursement of any loan. b. Page 41 is the title search report of title deed no. 6297 dated 09.02.1995 (Page 44) registered in the name of Sun Star Overseas reports at page 49 The said property can be taken as security by way of equitable mortgage by deposit of title deed . Remarks at the bottom of page 49Lien Mark in favour of Bank be obtained before disbursement of any loan c. Page 53 is the title search report of title deed no. 6294 dated 09.02.1995 (P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly have been reiterated and several allegations have been made regarding the conduct of lawyers who have given their opinions and also that of the Resolution Professional. Reliance has also been placed on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras decided on 08.11.1994 in C. Rajagopal Vs. State Bank of Travancore' reported in (1995) 1 MLJ 175, MANU/TN/0591/1994 to state that even deposit of copy of title deed with intent to create mortgage is sufficient for the purposes of Section 58(f) of Transfer of Property Act' 1882 (paragraphs 3, 5 and 9 of the said judgment are relevant). 12. We have gone through the arguments along with their submissions filed by both parties and have perused the records carefully. 13. The above narrations clearly establish many defaults on the part of the respondent. It is noted that though the CIRP started on 28.02.2019, precious time has been lost mainly due to the fact that the respondent has not been able to deposit the performance guarantee in time despite several accommodations made by the CoC. 14. It is also noted that the H-2 Bidder i.e. M/s. Pioneer Facor IT Infra Developers Private Limited (PHK) Consortium has come wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the present application, the applicant prays (a) pass appropriate orders/directions rejecting the resolution plan submitted by respondent No. 3, i.e. the purported H-1 bidder; (b) direct the CoC to consider the approval of resolution plan submitted by the present applicant, with or without amendments, if any, and (c) pass any order/order(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the instant case. 3. This application is closely linked with the IA No. 716/2020 in the sense that the present applicant was the H-2 Bidder in the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor i.e. International Mega Food Park Limited. In the present application, the applicant has made several allegations regarding the way CIRP proceedings was conducted and the respondent No. 3 - Ajay Yadav and Lata Yadav were declared H-1 Bidder over and above the offer given by the applicant. 4. The reply has been filed by Respondent No. 1 by Diary No. 00001/2 dated 28.01.2021 and Respondent No. 3 by Diary No. 00001/4 dated 11.08.2021 5. We have heard the learned counsels for the applicant, respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 3 and have perused the records carefully. 6. This Bench has already direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|