9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1772X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Private Limited was allowed with direction to the Resolution Professional to handover the land to the 1st Respondent including the claim amount within one week with further direction to the Resolution Professional to pay a cost of Rs.1 Lakh to the 1st Respondent. As per Agreement, the Corporate Debtor was holding the vacant land for the purpose of keeping the automobiles pursuant to the license and not any Lease Agreement. There is nothing on record to substantiate existence of workshop on said land - we are not inclined to interfere with substantive part of the order. However, we are of the view that it was not the case to impose any cost on the Resolution Professional. Therefore, we are inclined to interfere with such part of the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on on Resolution Professional to handover the land to said landlord Amar Universal Private Limited being a third party property. 2. The Appellant Resolution Professional, raised objection relating to claim made by the 1st Respondent on the ground that Amar Universal Private Limited has no complete right over the premises of land or has dues outstanding. 3. The Adjudicating Authority noticed that a civil suit is pending before the Court of Law and based on the agreement, the tenancy/ license fee was to be paid on 7th of every month by the Corporate Debtor, which entitles the owner of the land (1st Respondent) to reclaim the property if the rent is not paid. 4. The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Mumba ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the claim of the Respondent No. 1 was not decided by the Resolution Professional and no decision was communicated to the Landlord. 7. Further we find that as per Agreement, the Corporate Debtor was holding the vacant land for the purpose of keeping the automobiles pursuant to the license and not any Lease Agreement. There is nothing on record to substantiate existence of workshop on said land. 8. In that view of the matter, we are not inclined to interfere with substantive part of the order. However, we are of the view that it was not the case to impose any cost on the Resolution Professional. Therefore, we are inclined to interfere with such part of the impugned order. 9. Further we make it clear that the Resolution Profess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
