Sambhav Energy Ltd vs Union Of India
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Appellate Tribunal, having declined to interfere with the Tribunal's interim order of 8 August 2018, may appoint an Executive Officer under its own authority to supervise the affairs of a company subject to a serious fraud investigation, so as to ensure the company remains a going concern, with the Executive Officer's approval required for transfers, withdrawals, new projects, board and general meetings, and allotments pending the decision of the appeal.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
For Appellants : Mr. Yatin Oza, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Anup Jain, Advocate
For Respondent: Mr. Ashim Sood, CGSC, Ms. Payal Chandra, Advocate Mr. Saud Ahmad, Joint Director, SFIO
ORDER
07.12.2018 The 'Union of India' moved an application under Section
241read with Section 242 of the Companies Act, 2013 in public interest alleging
the acts of serious fraud against 'M/s. Sambhav Energy Limited & 13 others'
(appellants herein). In the said petition (C.P. No. 31/IB/2018), the National
Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench, (for short, 'the Tribunal') passed the
impugned interim order on 8th August, 2018 with the following directions:
"After hearing the Learned ASG and the counsel for
1st Respondent Company at length, and perusal of record
including the Memo filed on behalf of 1st Respondent
Company, the order given is as follows :
i) The 1st Respondent Company viz. M/s.
Sambhav Energy Limited, is hereby 2
restrained from transferring its
immovable properties in any manner or
encumbering the same until further
orders
ii) The 1st Respondent Company is
restrained from transferring/
withdrawing any money from its
accounts except to meet the legitimate
monthly expenses, which shall not be
more than average monthly expenses as
have been incurred during three months
preceding 31st of July 2018.
iii) If any expenditure/expenses is required
to be incurred over and above the
average monthly expenses as was done
during three preceding months, then, 1st
Respondent Company shall obtain prior
approval from this Bench.
iv) No Board Meetings or the other General
Meetings including Annual General
Meetings will be conducted without
seeking prior permission of this Bench
till further orders. "
2. Similar matters fell for consideration before this Appellate Tribunal
in 'Company Appeal (AT) No. 266 of 2018 - Kuldeep Kumar Dangi' and other
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018 3
connected appeals, in which one Mr. Shyam Murari Nigam was appointed as
Executive Officer by the Union of India. In the said appeal, the court passed the
following order on 4th October, 2018 :
"O R D E R
"The Respondent- 'Union of India' in their
counter affidavit stated that investigation carried
out by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office
(SFIO) revealed a large scale fraud perpetrated by
the 'Adarsh Group of Companies', has also taken
the following plea:
"9. It is submitted that no amounts
may be permitted to be released in respect
of the Appellant Companies for undertaking
new projects or repayment of loans to its
promoter society or related entities/ Group
Companies as the same would again
become a front for siphoning off money and
defeat the very purpose of freezing the
accounts of the Appellant Companies,
pending investigation. Any payment made
by the Appellant Companies should be
strictly only to service legitimate vendors for
verifiable expenses for ongoing, existing
projects.
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018 4
10. It is further submitted that the
Appellants have come on record to stated
that they have no objection if any officer
from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs is
appointed to verify and approve the
expenses of the Companies.
11. Without prejudice to the above
and in the event this Hon'ble Tribunal
accedes to the Appellant's request for
permitting payments and for appointing a
person to oversee the payments made by
the Appellant Companies, this Hon'ble
Tribunal may be pleased to appoint a
retired officer of the Central Government
having experience in finance as a Nominee
Director/ Administrative Officer for the
Appellant Companies. The appointment of
the Nominee Director/ Administrative
Officer should be at the expenses of the
Appellant Companies themselves, who
would verify and approve the legitimate
expenses of the Appellant Companies and
also meticulously scrutinizing/verifying the
end use/ utilization of the s aid amounts,
which would strictly be to service legitimate
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018 5
vendors for verifiable expenses for ongoing
existing projects. The Respondent
respectfully submits that in view of the
Respondent's involvement in investigation
and litigation before various judicial/
quasi-judicial forums, it may not be
appropriate to have a serving officer
appointed for this purpose.
12. That in view of the facts,
reasons and averments stated in the
foregoing paragraphs, it is most humbly
prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal may take
a view accordingly in the interest of
justice."
2. The following statement has been made
by the Union of India in their enclosure:
"The following name is proposed by the
Serious Fraud Investigation Office,
Ministry of Corporate Affairs for
appointment as Nominee Director/
Administrative Officer in terms of
Paragraph 11 of the counter affidavit:
Sh. Shyam Murari Nigam (Retd.) Member, Central Board of Direct Taxes Department of Revenue Ministry of Finance and Special Secretary to the Government of India
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018 6
Contact No: 9013854827 Email ID: smnigam@hotmail.com"
3. Curriculum Vitae of Mr. Shyam Murari
Nigam has been enclosed.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the Respondents submits that they have no
objection with regard to the suggestion made at
paragraph nos. 10 & 11 of the reply affidavit
filed by the Union of India. Learned counsel
raised objection with regard to the statement
made at Paragraph 9 of the reply affidavit.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the
parties, we pass following interim order for the
present.
i. Mr. Shyam Murari Nigam, (Retd.)
Member, Central Board of Direct
Taxes, Department of Revenue,
Ministry of Finance and Special
Secretary to the Government of India,
Contact No: 9013854827 Email ID:
smnigam@hotmail.com, is appointed
as Executive Officer to supervise all
the 32 (Appellant) Companies. The
main Company will pay the
Executive Officer remuneration of Rs.
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018 7
2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty
Thousand Only) per month. He
should be provided with a Car with
200 litres of petrol and other facilities
to which a Group-A Officer of the
Central Government is entitled to.
This will be in addition to actual
expenses as may be incurred by the
Executive Officer for visiting the 32
Companies or for any other official
purposes.
ii. The Board of Directors of respective
Appellant Companies will function
and shall take all steps and decision
but only with the prior approval of the
Executive Officer, who in his turn will
ensure that the Appellant Companies
continues to be remain going
concern(s). If the Board of Director's
or any of the officer of any Company
make hindrance in the functioning of
the Executive Officer, the Officer may
bring it to the notice of this Appellate
Tribunal.
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018 8
iii. The person(s), who are operating the
Bank accounts of respective
Companies may do so only with the
approval of the Executive Officer for
the purpose of day to day functioning
only. No fund or amount should be
diverted in favour of any third party
without prior approval of the
Executive Officer. The Executive
Officer will ensure that the expenses
for the day-to-day functioning of the
Company are cleared, which may
include the expenses towards supply
of material(s) for construction of the
building(s) and other infrastructures,
expenses of workmen, employees
and officers, electricity charges,
water charges, taxes etc. The Serious
Fraud Investigation Office is directed
to co-operate with the Companies
through the Executive Officer and will
allow to the Officers through
Executive Officer to deal with the
Bank accounts etc. for
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018 9
implementation of direction of this
Appellate Tribunal.
iv. Apart from the salary, wages,
payment towards electricity, water
charges, taxes if there is any doubt
with regard to expenses to be cleared
in favour of one or other party, the
Executive Officer will ask the
concerned Board of Directors/
Officers of the Company to give
clarification. On receipt of such
clarification and if satisfied, the
Executive Officer may clear the bills.
v. The Appellant Companies will not
undertake any new project(s) and
will complete the projects in hand.
Only on completion of the present
projects, the companies may take
steps for new projects, with the
approval of the Executive Officer.
vi. Loans payable to the 'Financial
Creditor' or the 'Operational
Creditor' should be cleared to
ensure that no insolvency
proceeding is triggered against any
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018 10
of the Companies. If there is any
'existing dispute' with regard to
amount payable to any 'Operational
Creditor', who have supplied goods
and rendered services, in such case,
loan may not be cleared.
vii. Taking into consideration that the
main business of the Companies are
construction of projects for allotment
of flats and commercial premises to
the allottees, allotment and
conveyance should be made in
favour of valid allottees, only after
verification by the Executive Officer
to ensure that 'Corporate Insolvency
Resolution Process' is not initiated
by any of the allottee against the
Companies.
6. The Central Government will inform of
this order to Mr. Shyam Murari Nigam. The
Registry of NCLAT is also directed to intimate
this order to Mr. Shyam Murari Nigam in the
address aforesaid.
Post these appeals 'for admission' on 28th
November, 2018.
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018 11
During the pendency of the appeals, any
decision taken by the National Company Law
Tribunal, shall be subject to the decision of the
appeals. The Serious Fraud Investigation Office
will continue with its investigation.
The interim order passed by the Tribunal
stands modified to the extent above."
3. Today, it is informed that 'Union of India' has not replaced the
management of the Company.
4. Having heard the parties, while we are not inclined to interfere with the
order dated 8th August, 2018, as suggested by the learned counsel for the Union
of India, appoint 'Mr. Shyam Murari Nigam' as 'Executive Officer' to look into the
affairs of the present company.
5. The Executive Officer will ensure that the company remains on going and
salary and wages of employees and workmen, payment towards electricity and
water charges, taxes, if required to be made, the management of the company
may bring the matter to the notice of the Executive Officer and in his absence
before the Investigation Officer, SFIO, who after verification will allow withdrawal
of such amount to ensure payment of salary and wages of employees and
workmen etc.
6. In 'Company Appeal (AT) No. 266 of 2018' we have fixed the salary of Mr.
Shyam Murari Nigam. However, as he will also function as 'Executive Officer' of
the present company in addition to the company in which he has engaged by the
Union of India, he will be entitled for admissible allowances and actual expenses
as may be incurred by him for performing the duties of the present company, in
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018 12
addition to what he is entitled pursuant to the order passed in respect of the
other companies.
7. So far as the construction of flats and commercial premises by the
company is concerned, Mr. Shyam Murari Nigam, EO will verify and if found that
the construction has already been started, in such case, they will allow
construction to continue in terms of the order passed on 4th October and
modified on 31st October, 2018 in 'Company Appeal (AT) No. 266 of 2018'.
The appeal stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions.
[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson
[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ] Member (Judicial)
/ns/uk /
Company Appeal (AT) No. 374 of 2018
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