9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 961X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arad Kumar Sharma ] Member ( Judicial ) And [ Jatindranath Swain ] Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : Mr. NV. Balaji , Advocate ORDER ( Hybrid Mode ) These are two connected Company Appeals Viz. Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 167 / 2024 and Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 168 / 2024, which has been preferred by the Appellant(s), who happens to be the erstwhile Director(s) of M/s. RRP Housing Private Limited (the `Corporate Debtor'), which were engaged in the Real Estate Projects. 2. The challenge in the instant Company Appeal Viz. Comp. App (AT) (CH) (INS) No. 167 / 2024, as it has been given by the Appellant is to the Impugned Order dated 13.03.2024, by virtue of which, the Appellant's Application being IA (IBC)/ 118 (CHE) / 2023 h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, because there was no satisfactory publication made by the Liquidator, inviting the potential purchasers, as per the Rules. He further contends that the Sale itself would be defective, also because it is only the Respondent No. 2, who had submitted his Offer in the Auction proceedings. 8. In the Interlocutory Application thus preferred by the Appellant before the Learned Adjudicating Authority, he has questioned the validity of the Auction Sale, as it was conducted by the Liquidator / Respondent No. 1 herein and primarily the ground of challenge by the Appellant was to the Auction Sale as made on 05.05.2022, which later on stood confirmed on 13.03.2024, was on the ground of mala fides contending thereof that the Auction Sale was in fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Corporate Debtor, was resorted to. 13. After giving a thoughtful consideration to the arguments extended by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant(s), the fact which would emerge from records is that the status of the present Appellant(s) happens to be that of the Erstwhile Director / Shareholder of the Corporate Debtor, as against whom the Order of Liquidation has already attained finality up to the Appellate stage before this Tribunal. 14. The Liquidator stood appointed by an Order dated 04.04.2019 and consequent to it, the Sale proceedings was completed on 05.05.2022, whereafter the Sale Certificate was issued. The Interlocutory Application which was thus filed by the Appellant was after the confirmation of the Auction Sale which wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d attained finality against them by the Order of the Appellate Tribunal and that too, further when the Auction held on 05.05.2022 has already been affirmed by the Order of 31.03.2024 and thirdly, the funds accrued from the such Sale have already been distributed, as notified by the Liquidator on 12.03.2024. 17. At this belated stage questioning the Auction Sale made on 05.05.2022 by the Liquidator, on the alleged procedural discrepancies as argued by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant without substantiating it, may not be a subject which could de-novo be scrutinised and be considered by this `Tribunal', particularly when he has not placed his grievances at the appropriate stage, before the Liquidator himself at the stage when he issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
