Ascot Realty Private Limited vs Starlight Real Estate Ascot Mauritius ...
- CitationComp. App. (AT) No. 29 of 2025
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appellate tribunal disposed of the appeals without deciding the merits, so the question is whether the order rests on any reasoned principle. It does: it holds that where the impugned interim order itself gave the affected party liberty to seek leave of the Tribunal for relief from the freezing directions, and that leave was never sought, the appellant has not exhausted the remedy available before the Tribunal, and the appeal is therefore disposed of by granting time to apply for leave, with the bank freeze and any coercive action held in abeyance until that application is decided.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Ascot Realty Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Starlight Real Estate (Ascot) Mauritius Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr Dhruv Surana, Advocate. For Respondents : Ms. Meghna Sharma (R3), Dr. Aman Hingo Rani (Sr. Adv.), Mr Jay Zaveri, Mr Himanshu Satija, Ms Rhea Prakash, Mr Aditya Bajaj, Mr Harsh Saxena, Ms Aditi Ladda, Mr. Anshul Rao, for R1 and R2, Advocates. Mr Jehan Fouzdas for R3, Advocates.
With Comp. App. (AT) No. 30 of 2025
IN THE MATTER OF: Ascot Realty Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Starlight Real Estate (Ascot) Mauritius Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents
Present: For Appellant : Mr Dhruv Surana, Advocate. For : Ms. Meghna Sharma (R3), Dr. Aman Hingo Rani (Sr. Respondents Adv.), Mr Jay Zaveri, Mr Himanshu Satija, Ms Rhea Prakash, Mr Aditya Bajaj, Mr Harsh Saxena, Ms Aditi Ladda, Mr. Anshul Rao, for R1 and R2, Advocates. Mr. Jehan Fouzdas for R3, Advocates.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
20.08.2025 Before coming to the impugned orders in Comp. App. (AT)
No. 29/2025 as well as Comp. App. (AT) No. 30/2025, the following facts are
relevant to be noted. Admittedly one M/s Starlight Real Estate (Ascot)
Mauritius Ltd. (R1), M/s Starlight Real Estate Mauritius Ltd (R2).,
incorporated Augustus Avani Land Developers Pvt. Ltd (R3). Now M/s
Augustus Avani Land Developers Pvt. Ltd with M/s Jagrati Trade Services
Pvt. Ltd. incorpated the Appellant (a Joint Venture) herein namely M/s Ascot
Realty Pvt. Ltd.
2. In the year 2017, the Respondents No.1 and 2 herein had filed a
Company Petition No. 761(MB/2017) against Respondent No.3 and its other
directors and during its proceedings an I.A. No. 135/2024 was filed under
Section 213 of the Companies Act by R1 and R2 seeking directions against
Respondent No.3. It is alleged investigation was initiated against M/s Jagrati
Trade Services Pvt. Ltd. and the appellants herein, without giving any notice
and without hearing to the Appellant herein, the impugned order dated
28.10.2024 was passed. The said order is as under:
"1. Sr. Counsel Aman Hingovani a/w Adv. Rhea Parkash and Adv. Vinay Khatri i/b Croford Bayley & Co. for the Petitioners present. Adv. Kshamaya Deniel for the Respondent No.1 present.
2. The bank accounts of Respondent No.1 Company as well as Joint Venture Company Ascot Realty Private Limited shall not be allowed to be operated and shall also not be operated by any person without leave of this Tribunal. The parties hereto shall be at liberty to bring the copy of this order to the notice of the concerned bankers/institutions.
3. The Petitioners are directed to suggest a name of the Forensic Auditor for consideration of appointment thereof in case this Tribunal consider it appropriate to do so after hearing the parties.
4. List this matter on Board on 28.11.2024."
3. The bank accounts of Respondent No.1 Company as well as of the Joint
Venture Company namely M/s Ascot Realty Private Limited were freezed &
were not allowed to be operated upon by any person without leave of the Ld.
Tribunal and the parties were also put at liberty to bring the copy of the order
dated. 28.10.2024 to the notice of the concerned bankers/institutions.
4. Vide the impugned order, the Petitioners in C.P. No. 761(supra) were
rather directed to suggest a name of Forensic Auditor for consideration of his
appointment thereof, in case this Tribunal consider it appropriate to do so
after hearing the parties.
5. Thereafter, yet another order dated 28.11.2024 was passed by the Ld.
NCLT, Mumbai bench as under:
"2. This Bench vide order dated 28.10.2024 directed the Petitioners to suggest a name of the Forensic Auditor for consideration of appointment thereof in case this Tribunal consider it appropriate to do so after hearing the parties.
3. Today, the Petitioner handed the note across the Bench and also recommended the name of Khandelwal Jain & Co., PIL, New Marine Lines, as Forensic Auditor of the Respondent Company and the Respondent also consented to the same.
4. The Scope of Work of the Forensic Auditor is reproduced below:
Money Trail:
Extracting all of the bank account statements and records of Augustus and Ascot....
5. The Petitioner shall fix the remuneration of the Forensic auditor and the bare the cost of the forensic audit.
6. It is the submission of the Learned Counsel for the Appellant the above
impugned orders were passed in the absence of the Appellant as they were
never made a party to C.P. 761(supra) and without giving an opportunity of
being heard to them, their bank accounts were directed to be freezed.
7. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent argued otherwise and
rather alleged the Appellant now does not represent real Ascot Realty Pvt. Ltd.
8. In any case, if one peruse the impugned order dated 28.10.2024 the
Ld. NCLT, had given liberty to the parties to seek leave of the Tribunal for
defreezing of the bank accounts. Admittedly such leave has never been
applied for by the Appellant. Thus, we dispose of these appeals by granting
an opportunity to the Appellant to seek leave of the Tribunal in terms of the
order dated 28.10.2024 by presenting its case and to take all its contentions
before the Learned NCLT by moving appropriate an application(s) for the said
purpose.
9. The application(s) seeking leave may be filed within two weeks' from
today. Till such application(s) is decided, no coercive action be taken against appellant(s) herein by Ld. NCLT in terms of its orders dated 28.10.2024 &
28.11.2024.
10. In view of the above, the appeals stand disposed of. Pending
application, if any, are also closed.
[Justice Yogesh Khanna] Member (Judicial)
[Indevar Pandey] Member (Technical)
MT/MD
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free