Pratosh Kumar Sharma vs M/S Bhanvi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors

Present: Mr. Krishnondu Datta, Advocate with Mr. Rishi Kapoor and Mr. Sourabh Gupta, Advocates for the Appellant

Mr. Arun Vohra with Mr. Pawan Sharma arel Ms Arpita Yadav, Advooutes for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2

ORDER

issue Notice. Contesting respondents | and 2 have appeared and accepted motice. Reat being the formal respondents, na notice nead be

issued toe them.

"*. Heard the parties. Taking inte consideration the prima facie view

expressed by National Company Lew Tribunal, New Delhi at paragraph 9 and 10 of the Order dated 21% October 2016 passed in Company Appheation No. S-CL-I/2016 in Company Petidan No. SOUND) of 2016, while we are not inclined to interfere with the order of appointment of interim Administrator, we are of the view that for submitting the report it Was mot neoeasary for the Tribumal to direct the Interim Administrator to

take Interim custody of the assets and properties of the company. The

é

direction te take interim custody of the booke of accounts, vouchers and paper is justified for the purpose of submitting a proper report before the Tribunal, Por the reason aforesaid while we set aside the part of the order by which Tribumal directed the appellant/compargy to give interim custody of the assets and properties of the company, uphold the rest part of the interim onder dated 21% October 20146 passed by the Tribunal. However, it is made olear that if the appellant or the management of the company intend to sell or mortgage or alienate or encumber any of the agsetis} or properties of the company, they will intimate the details of the same te the Interim Administrator as also to the Respendent Nas. 1 and 2 of this Company Appesl. In such case the payment, if any, received should be duly recorded in the current books of accounts and amount should be deposited in the bank account of the company with details to be furnished te the Adininistrator.

3. Farther, itis made clear that the observations made by the Tribunal at paragraphs 8, 8 and 10 or other paragraphs of the impugned order dated 21% Oeteber 2016 are only prima facie opinien framed by the Tianal and cannoet be relied by any of the party or the Tribunal during Rnal hearing or judgement aa may be passed in the Company Petition. The Campany petition should be decided on merit on the hasis of the evidence on record and the report as may be submitted by the Interim Administrator urinfhuenced by the impugned arder dated 215 Oetober 2016 and eartier Interim Order dated 4 March 2016.

4 Tt ig expected that the Tribunal will decide the case expeditiously in wiew of time frame prescribed under Section 422 of the Companies Act 2013,

S. The appellants will cooperate with the Interim Administrator and hand over hooks of accounts, vouchers anc papers to the tnterim Administrator as directed by the Tribunal immediately.

-3»

& The Appellant/company is allowed access to the books of account for

the purpose of maintaining the current entries.

7. The bepugned Order dated 218 October 2016 nsssed by the Tribunal in Company Petition No. SIND) of 2016 stands modified to the extent of the above, The Company Appeal stands disposed of with aforesaid observation and direction.

iJuatio: S./ Mukhbonadhaya} Chaurpersern

(Mr. Babvinder Singh} Member [Pechnical

e