9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 622X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me of passing of the impugned order, this Tribunal , is constrained to interfere with the said order, and sets aside the same because of the fact that the Respondent No.1 / Resolution Professional, in Law has only An Authority to exercise control over Bank Accounts operated by the Corporate Debtor and not otherwise. Appeal allowed. - Company Appeal (AT) (CH) (Ins.) No. 316/2021 - - - Dated:- 7-6-2022 - [Justice M. Venugopal] Member (Judicial) And [Mr. KanthiNarahari] TS/TM Member (Technical) For the Appellant : Mr. Ramakrishnan Viraraghavan, Senior Counsel Mr. Chetan Sagar, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. M. Savitha Devi, Advocate for R2 R1 R3 Not Appeared ORDER (VIRTUAL MODE) Heard the Learned Senio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion that the Bank Accounts belong to the Corporate Debtor. In this connection, it is not out of place for this Tribunal to make the pertinent mention that the Respondent No.1/Resolution Professional had stated in his letter dated 16.06.2021 to the effect that he had asked the Bank not to operate the said Accounts under any instructions from the Corporate Debtor and also restrain the Corporate Debtor from operating the said Accounts under any circumstances (vide page No.47 of the Appeal paper). The primordial contention addressed on behalf of the Appellant by the Learned Senior Counsel for the Appellant is that Respondent No.1/Resolution Professional (RP) does not have any authority to freeze the Four Bank Accounts viz., (1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20,75,29,662 50% to be paid 4. Customer Cancellation refund payment 41,67,943 To be paid in full Accordingly, this IA(IBC)/926(CHE)/2021stands disposed of . It is to be noted that the Appellant is the only Account Holder and the Appellant s name is found in the Statement of Accounts (vide Page No.55 - 59 of the Appellant s Paper Book). As such, it is latently and patently quite clear and evident that the Respondent No.1 / Resolution Professional has No Authority in Law to exercise his power over the Four Bank Accounts and as a consequence thereof, he cannot freeze these Bank Accounts in the considered op ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spect of the matter was not addressed by the Adjudicating Authority and the same is conspicuously absent at the time of passing of the impugned order dated 01.11.2021 in IA(IBC)/926(CHE)/2021 in IBA/1423/2019, this Tribunal , is constrained to interfere with the said order, and sets aside the same because of the fact that the Respondent No.1 / Resolution Professional, in Law has only An Authority to exercise control over Bank Accounts operated by the Corporate Debtor and not otherwise. Viewed in the above perspective, the impugned order dated 01.11.2021 in IA(IBC)/926(CHE)/2021 in IBA/1423/2019 is hereby set aside by this Tribunal , to secure the ends of justice. Resultantly the Appeal succeeds. In fine, the Company Appeal ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
