9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, 2016. In the present application, Mr. Sumat Gupta, Resolution Professional of M/s. International Mega Food Park Limited is the applicant, and M/s. Ajay Yadav and Lata Yadav are the respondents. 2. In the present application, the applicant prays (1) Direct the respondent to deposit the performance guarantee immediately and in case of his failure, to forfeit the deposit of Rs. 10 lakhs given as EMD as well as partial Performance Security of Rs. 1.00 Crore. (2) Direct that in case the respondent agrees to take over the corporate debtor as per the resolution plan already approved by CoC, he may be asked to match the resolution bid of Rs. 75.50 crores. (3) direct that in case of failure of the respondent/resolution applicant to comply with t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ur 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, the respondent deposited Rs. 1.00 Crore as FDR on 19.03.2020. However, the balance performance security is yet to be deposited by the Resolution Applicant. 6. The applicant filed an application for approval of the resolution plan on 23.03.2022/26/06/2020 (IA No. 615/2020 and 616/2020 in CP (IB) No. 174/Chd/CHD/2018) by email/online in anticipation that the respondent shall stand by his commitment of furnishing balance performance security in the shape of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dents by their reply filed by Diary No. 01652/4 dated 11.08.2021 have attempted to explain the reasons for their lack of compliance. It is stated that on 19.03.2020, an FDR of Rupees One Crore has been submitted by the respondent and pursuant to the CoC's consent for the acceptance of the third-party property, the title deeds of two pieces of land have already been submitted to the Resolution Professional for consideration as security. 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Page 66 of Additional Affidavit). It is, thus, conclusively stated that the third-party property offered by Resolution Applicant is not to the satisfaction of CoC/RP and, hence, cannot be accepted as performance security. Resolution Applicant deserves to be directed to give cash security. The applicant further alleges that the Resolution Applicant has not complied with the terms of email dated 11.07.2020 (Page 34) despite the following accommodations granted: a. Documents of 29A compliance of third party not submitted. b. Personal guarantee of third party not submitted. c. Original documents of title of the property not submitted. d. The property offered is landlocked both by valuer as well as Sh. Raju Chopra, Advocate e. Valuat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 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 with a resolution bid of Rs. 75.50 Crores. Records indicate that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idered a serious setback to the CIRP proceedings and a strong message need to go to such defaulters. This Bench, therefore, directs in the event of the failure to deposit the performance guarantee by the respondent, the deposit of Rs. 10 Lakhs as well as the partial performance security of Rs. 1.00 Crore furnished earlier should be forfeited. Consequently, IA No. 716/2020 is partly allowed and accordingly stands disposed of. 2. IA No. 2/2021 This is an application filed under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016. In the present application, Pioneer Facor IT Infradevelopers Private Limited (PHK consortium) is the applicant and Mr. Sumat Kumar Gupta, Resolution Professional, Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
