Mr. Sumat Kumar Gupta R.P M/S ... vs M/S International Fresh Farm Product ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1442 of 2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority's holding that it lacks jurisdiction to decide the payment of lease rentals for refrigerated vehicles up to the date of delivery cannot stand where the Appellate Tribunal has already held, in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 190 of 2021, that lease rentals fall within the definition of "asset" under Section 18 of the Code and that the Resolution Professional may apply to the Adjudicating Authority for differential lease amounts; that ruling is binding on this bench and the impugned order, insofar as it declines jurisdiction over rentals, is set aside. Where the question of whether lease rentals payable into an escrow account are the Corporate Debtor's assets can be decided on the lease and escrow agreements without elaborate evidence, it is not a complicated question of fact or law, and the Adjudicating Authority is competent to decide it on the documents filed, uninfluenced by any observation of the Appellate Tribunal on the merits.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Sumat Kumar Gupta ...Appellant(s) Resolution Professional, M/s International Mega Food Park Ltd.
Versus
International Fresh Farm Product India Ltd. ...Respondent(s) Present: For Appellant : Dr. Rajansh Thukral, Dr. Surekha Thukral, Mr. Sidharth Thukral, Advocates. For Respondents : None. ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
10.03.2025: This appeal is filed against an impugned order dated
13.10.2022 passed by the Ld. NCLT, Chandigarh in IA No. 942/2020 in CP(IB)
No. 174/Chd/2018.
2. It is the submission of Learned Counsel for the Appellant vide impugned
order the Ld. NCLT has held there is no dispute qua ownership of the Vehicles
in question and the Respondent was directed to handover the possession of
the above mentioned vehicle to the Resolution Professional within 15 days of
the order. However, the impugned order hold the payment of lease rent of
Refrigerated Vehicles up to the date of delivery is not within its jurisdiction to
decide.
3. However, in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 190 of 2021 an order dated
05.09.2022 was passed as follows:
"10. Having observed that lease rentals fall within the definition of 'asset' as defined under Section 18 of the Code, specifically keeping in view the facts of the attendant case, we are of the view that the RP is empowered to move an Application before the Adjudicating Authority seeking the differential lease -2- amounts, if any. We are of the earnest view that the issue on hand does not require any elaborate evidence keeping in view the lease Agreement and the Escrow Account Agreement filed by the parties.
......
17. We are of the earnest view that the payment/non- payment of lease rentals into the Escrow Account, has a direct nexus with the duties of the RP and the Insolvency of the 'Corporate Debtor' as we hold that 'it is an asset of the Corporate Debtor' and the Respondent cannot be construed as any third party 'Sundry Debtor'. Having regard to the Agreements entered into and the facts of the case, we are of the earnest view that the issue is not a complicated issue of fact or law which cannot be decided by the Adjudicating Authority based on the documents filed.
18. For the aforenoted reasons, we are of the considered view that there are no complicated questions of facts involved in the instant case and Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 190/2021 is allowed and the Order of the Adjudicating Authority is set aside. Both parties are directed to appear before the Adjudicating Authority on 25.09.2022 and the Adjudicating Authority shall proceed in accordance with law uninfluenced by any observation herein. It is to be noted that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter on hand."
4. Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the judgement
cited above, we set aside the order dated 13.10.2022 qua issue of rentals and
both the parties are directed to appear before the Ld. NCLT on 20.03.2025.
The Ld. NCLT shall proceed to decide application IA No. 942/2020 in
accordance with law and being uninfluenced by any observation made earlier.
The appeal stands disposed of. Pending applications are also disposed of.
[Justice Yogesh Khanna] Member (Judicial)
[Mr. Ajai Das Mehrotra] Member (Technical)
R.N./Manu.
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