9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 377X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in addition to institute a criminal prosecutions against the Respondent therein including Appellant herein under Section 69 of the I B Code, 2016 - there are no error in the impugned order on this account and the Appellant could not establish that Rs. 23 lakhs were indeed paid by him to the Corporate Debtor. This Appellate Tribunal is of the considered opinion that there is no error in the impugned order dated 13.12.2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority - Appeal is devoid of any merit is therefore dismissed. - Company Appeal ( AT ) ( Ins. ) No. 1083 OF 2022 - - - Dated:- 9-2-2023 - [ Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain ] Member ( Judicial ) And [ Naresh Salecha ] Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : Mr. Manu Bansal Mr. Dhruv Gupta , Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. Abhishek Naik , Ms. Gulafsha Kureshi , Mr. Mrigank Kumar Ms. Gauri Swarup Bansal , Advocates JUDGMENT ( Virtual Mode ) NARESH SALECHA , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) The Present Appeal is filed against the impugned order dated 13.12.2021 passed in CP (IB) 1359 (ND)/2019 in IA/2844/2020 by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench), whereby, the Adjudica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uctions 12,40,412 31.03.2015 Appellant to CD s Related Party upon its instructions 7,59,588 TOTAL 30,00,000 30,00,000 5. Counsel for the Appellant stated that he has received Rs. 20 lakhs from the Corporate Debtor on 06.05.2014 and Rs. 10 lakhs on 29.08.2014. Counsel for Appellant further stated that out of these, Rs. 10 was returned by the Appellant to Corporate Debtor on 15.09.2014 vide UTR Transaction No. NTBLR520140915000002 and again Rs. 20 lakhs Corporate Debtor instructed Appellant to adjust dues as under :- That towards balance amount of Rs.20,00,000/- Iying outstanding, on 30.03.2015 Corporate Debtor instructed the Appellant adjust the said dues as under: a. Sum of Rs.12.40.412/- towards adjustment of dues in car loan a/c taken by Corporate Debtor from the Appellant. In this regard it is pertinent to mention that Corporate Debtor had obtained a Car Loan to the extent of Rs. 12,00,000/- from the Appellant in April 2014 vide agreement no. TBO5018 and as on 30.03.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or the Respondent empathetically denied that the Adjudicating Authority did not give any opportunity to Appellant to represent his case thereby violating principal of natural justice. Counsel for the Respondent stated that right to file Reply by the Appellant in I.A. No. 2844 of 2020 was closed by the Adjudicating Authority vide its order dated 13.07.2021 after noticing that even after applicating listed on multiple dates from 19.09.2020 to 13.07.2021, no Reply has been filed by the Respondents therein including Appellant herein. Counsel for the Respondent further pointed out that the Adjudicating Authority had directed answering Respondent herein and the Appellant therein to furnish documents regarding Respondent therein vide service of notice by filing Additional Affidavit which was filed on 10.07.2021 by the Respondent herein/ Appellant therein and then only the Adjudicating Authority on 13.07.2021 had closed the right of the Appellant to file Reply by the Appellant. 12. Counsel for the Respondent refuted that Appellant had made the payment and stated that the Appellant had not placed any valid document on record like agreements, audited financial statement to ascertain that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice of notice was done by both modes. ➢ In addition to service of notice, this Appellate Tribunal also take into account from the Additional Affidavit placed before the Adjudicating Authority in which details of date wise appearance of the Advocate on behalf of the Respondents have been provided which reads as under:- List depicting Advocate Appearances on behalf of Respondent in IA 2844/ 2020 in Response/ Pursuance to service of notice by the Advocate of the Resolution Professional PARTICULARS ADVOCATE APPEAREANCE ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS HBN Dairies and Allied Ltd. Mr. Abhishek Parmar/ Mr. Rohit Sehgal (Order dated 14.08.2020; 19.08.2020; 21.08.2020; 02.09.2020; 14.09.2020; 12.10.2020; 28.10.2020) HBN Home Colonies Pvt. Ltd. Mr. Mohit Nandwani/ Ms. Kritika (Order dated 14.08.2020; 19.08.2020; 21.08.2020; 02.09.2020; 08.09.2020; 14.09.2020; 12.10.2020; 28.10.2020) Complete News Entertainment Broadcast Pvt. Ltd. Mr. D.S. Sobti/ Mr. Vaibhabh Sahni (Order dated 14.08.2020; 19.08.2020; 21.08.2020; 02.09.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng letter of HBN Foods Limited dated 30.03.2015. ➢ On a pointed query by this Appellate Tribunal to the Appellant as to whom this letter has been issued, reason for issuing this letter, Board of Director s Resolution Authorising Mrs. Sran to issue such letter etc., non- availability of any company seal on above alleged letter, the Appellant could not give any direct and convincing answers. ➢ We have perused carefully the impugned order where this point has been considered. The Adjudicating Authority has stated that the Respondent Nos. 1 to 20 therein including Appellant herein are related parties of the Corporate Debtor. ➢ This Appellate Tribunal also take into consideration the following para recorded in the impugned order dated 13.12.2021 by the Adjudicating Authority. It is further contended that SEBI vide it s order dated 12.02.2015 has found the Promoters/ Directors guilty of running an unregistered collective investment scheme and misappropriating funds collected from lots of people and the said order is upheld by SAT on 28.06.2017. Further recovery officer SEBI has assessed worth more than Rs. 1,000 crores. It is further contend ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
