Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Atul Kumar Kansal vs State Bank Of India

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal8 July 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where the Adjudicating Authority has directed the Resolution Professional to ensure that no rights are created over property that is the subject of a status quo prayer, and has declined the prayer for status quo on the ground that the underlying MOU stood cancelled by a civil court order, the Appellate Tribunal will not interfere absent any shown ground for disturbing that order; the appellant's failure to show a ground for release of a bank guarantee furnished by the corporate debtor and its directors likewise justifies declining interference, and the moratorium is a basis for directing that such a guarantee not be invoked pending further orders.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALNEW DELHI

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 692 of 2019

IN THE MATTER OF:

Atul Kumar Kansal ...Appellant

Versus

Nova Realtors Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondents

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 693 of 2019

IN THE MATTER OF:

Atul Kumar Kansal ...Appellant

Versus

State Bank of India ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Neelambika Singh, Advocate

ORDER

08.07.2019 The 'Resolution Professional' has preferred this appeal against

the order dated 27th May, 2019, which reads as follows:

"CA 439/2019 has been filed by the

Resolution Professional praying for a status quo in

respect of land belonging to the Respondent no. 1.

Reply to this has been filed by the registered owner

of the land. Relying upon the decision of the civil

court, the non-applicant submits that the MOU dated 2

12th March, 2010 has been declared cancelled vide

an order dated 24th January, 2018.

In view of the same, RP shall ensure that no

rights are created over this property. The prayer

made in this application does not merit any

consideration and is dismissed."

The same very 'Resolution Professional' has filed a 'Company Appeal

(AT) (Insolvency) No. 693 of 2019' against the same very impugned order in

C.A. No. 501/2019, which reads as under:

"CA 501/2019 has been filed praying or

release of the amount by way of security for

furnishing a bank guarantee which is valid up to 31st

July, 2019. This Bank guarantee has been given by

the Corporate Debtor and its Directors. Keeping in

view the moratorium imposed, it is directed that this

bank guarantee shall not be invoked till further orders

of this court.

Mr. Sameer Kumar, Bank Manager, State Bank

of India is present in court and has been apprised of

the order."

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and taking into

consideration the facts, the Adjudicating Authority has allowed the 'Resolution

Professional' to ensure that no rights are created over the property.

Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the Bank Guarantee of

Rs.2,26,37,394/- and another FDR is Rs. 99 Lakhs against which the Bank

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 692 & 693 of 2019 3

Guarantee subsists. However, taking into conisation the facts that no ground

shown by the Appellant for release of the amount by way of security (Bank

Guarantee), we are no inclined to interfere with the impugned order. However,

we make it clear that if the 'Resolution Professional' has difficulty to keep the

company a going concern he may bring the same to the notice of the

Adjudicating Authority and the Adjudicating Authority may decide the matter

afresh without influenced by the impugned order dated 27th May, 2019 or the

order passed by this Appellate Tribunal.

Both the appeals stand disposed of with aforesaid observations.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[ Justice A.I.S. Cheema ] Member (Judicial)

[ Kanthi Narahari ] Member (Technical) /ns/gc

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 692 & 693 of 2019

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