Prernaa Arora vs Maya Gupta & Ors

IN THE MATTER OF: Prernaa Arora ...Appellant

Versus

Maya Gupta Resolution Professional for Kriarj Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondents

Present: For Appellant: Mr. Siddharth Chapalgaogkar & Ms. Sneha Botwe, Advocates.

For Respondents: Mr. Kunal Godhwani & Ms. Kinjal Chadha, Advocates for R1.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

17.07.2025: Heard Ld. Counsel for the Appellant as well as Ld.

Counsel for the Respondent.

2. This appeal has been filed by the Appellant challenging the order

dated 31.08.2023 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT),

New Delhi, Court-VI in IA No. 6059/ND/2022.

3. The Adjudicating Authority by the impugned order has directed the

Appellant to remit the amount of Rs.25 lakhs to the RP of the CD within 15

days. Aggrieved by the order, this appeal has been filed.

4. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant challenging the order submitted that

Adjudicating Authority has no jurisdiction to adjudicate on the issue which

was raised in the application by the RP and secondly under the order of the 2

Hon'ble Bombay High Court which has been followed, the amount was to be

paid to entity Gothic Entertainment hence, the said amount could not have

been paid to the CD.

5. Ld. Counsel appearing for the Respondent refuting the submission

submits that Appellant who is Ex- Director of the CD did not appear before

the Adjudicating Authority in the application under Section 19(2) by the RP.

It is submitted that the order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court which is

referred to by the Appellant clearly indicates that Respondent No.1 had

returned the amount to the Appellant and the Appellant had to deposit the

amount in CD's account hence, she was liable to deposit the amount.

6. It is submitted that no adjudication of any issue was needed since

amount of Rs.25 lakhs which was refunded by the Respondent No.1 was

given to appellant.

7. We have considered the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the parties

and perused the records.

8. The application was filed by the Resolution Professional being IA No.

6059/2022, seeking direction for remittance of the amount of Rs.25 lakhs in

which application, following prayers were made:

"a. Allow the present Application;

b. Pass an order directing Respondent No.1 to refund an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- to the Corporate Debtor alongwith pendente lite interest at the rate of 12% per annum till the date of realization of the amount;

c. pass such other or further order(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the instant case."

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1506 of 2023 3

9. It is on record that Respondent No. 1 to the application had already

refunded the amount of Rs.25 lakhs for CD in the account of appellant since

the account of corporate debtor was inoperative and the amount which was

refunded by Mr. Abhishek Bachchan could not be received in the account of

the corporate debtor.

10. It is submitted that amount having been received by the appellant

which was on behalf of the corporate debtor, adjudicating authority has

rightly directed the appellant to remit the amount.

11. Learned counsel for the respondent has referred to the additional

affidavit filed by the appellant in the present appeal, where in paragraph 8,

the present appellant has pleaded as follows:

"I say that pursuant to the High Court Order, the Corporate Debtor through its Director Mrs. Protima Arora, addressed a letter dated 18th March 2020 to Answering Respondent, inter alia, acknowledging receipt of the said demand draft and requesting for issuing a fresh pay order/demand draft in favour of Mrs. Premaa Arora i.e. Respondent No.3 herein, which would be treated as full refund of signing amount. The said letter also irrevocably confirmed that upon receipt of a fresh pay order in favour of Respondent No.3 herein, neither the Corporate Debtor nor its affiliates/ associates will have any claim against Answering Respondent. This letter was duly acknowledged on behalf of the Respondents No.2 &

3. Hereto annexed and marked as Annexure - 1 is a copy of the letters dated 18th March 2020 addressed by the Corporate Debtor to this Respondent."

12. The averment of the appellant is that amount returned back from Mr.

Abhishek Bachchan was received by appellant on behalf of the corporate

debtor.

13. We are of the view that the amount which was received on behalf of

the corporate debtor by the appellant from Mr. Abhishek Bachchan was Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1506 of 2023 4

liable to be refunded to the corporate debtor and in the application filed by

the RP, adjudicating authority has rightly directed for remittance of the

amount to the corporate debtor by the appellant. Insofar as the submission

of the appellant that adjudication ought not to have been done by the

adjudicating authority on the said issue, suffice it to say that there was no

dispute with regard to corporate debtor's entitlement of Rs.25 lakhs from

Mr. Abhishek Bachchan and return of the said amount by Mr. Abhishek

Bachchan to the corporate debtor which amount due to account of the

corporate debtor being in operative was received by the appellant, in the

said background adjudicating authority has rightly directed the appellant to

refund the amount.

With the above observations, we dismiss the appeal and vacate the

impugned order.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Abhishek/nn

Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1506 of 2023