Mgb Advisors Private Limited vs Ajay Agarwal Liquidator Of Pan India ...

MGB Advisors Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellant(s)

Versus

Ajay Agarwal, Liquidator of Pan India Infra Projects ...Respondent(s) Pvt. Ltd. Present: For Appellant : Mr. Vaibhav , Mr. Hritik Mehta, Advocates. For Respondents :

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode) 11.11.2024: Heard Counsel for the Appellant.

2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 22.07.2024 passed

by Adjudicating Authority on IA 1852/2024 by which order Appellant has

prayed to recall the order dated 05.02.2024 passed in NCLT in IA

2188/2023. CIRP in the present case was initiated on 16.07.2020, public

announcement was made by the IRP on 25.07.2020 and on 29.07.2020 an

amount of Rs. 22,50,000/- was transferred from the account of CD to the

appellant herein.

3. The RP gave a notice to the appellant in the year 2021 asking them to

deposit the amount back in the CD. Notice was issued on 29.09.2021 which

was replied by the appellant also. Subsequently, when the amount was not

deposited the IA 2188/2023 was filed before the Adjudicating Authority for

refund of the amount of Rs. 22,50,000/-.

4. The Respondents were given time to file reply. When no reply was filed

the adjudicating authority passed an order on 05.02.2024 for refund of the

amount. Thereafter an application has been filed by the appellant IA

1852/2024 for recall of the order. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submits

that appellant was never issued notice by the adjudicating authority and the

notice which was issued by the NCLT was received on 17.01.2024 itself in

the evening.

5. We have considered the submissions of the Counsel for the parties

and perused the record.

6. The notice was issued by the RP to appellant on 29.09.2021 for refund

of the amount which notice was admittedly received by the appellant and

reply to which was filed. IA No. 2188/2023 filed by the RP according to own

case of the appellant notice was received from NCLT on 17.01.2024 when

the case was listed. There is no denial of the receipt of the notice but the

appellant states that after the receipt of the notice he wrote to the liquidator

to the RP to give the copy of the application and the link which was given by

the RP could not be accessed by the appellant.

7. We have considered the submissions for the Counsel of the Appellant

and perused the record.

8. The appellant was already on 29.09.2021 asked to refund the amount

which was transferred to the appellant after imposition of moratorium on

16.07.2020. Appellant replied the notice and did not refund the amount

thereafter the RP had no option except to file the application. The application filed by RP on 17.01.2024 and thereafter the matter was listed

on 05.02.2024 before the Adjudicating Authority.

9. Appellants plea that he wrote to the RP and wanted the copy of the

application does not appeal to us. When the notice was issued by the NCLT

it was open for the appellant to appear before the NCLT and make the

enquiries and file an objection.

10. We thus are of the view that present is not the fit case where this

tribunal may interfere with the order of the adjudicating authority rejecting

the IA 1852/2024 filed by the appellant.

11. Appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)

[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) sr/nn