Sushila Goyal vs Durga Das Agrawal

IN THE MATTER OF: Sushila Goyal & Ors. ...Appellants

Versus Durga Das Agarwal, ...Respondents RP of MKMG Jewel Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhishek Nair, Mr. Vansh Srivastava and Ms. Parul Khurana, Advocates. For Respondents : Mr. Vipul Ganda, Mr. Shivam Gautam, Ms. Nitu and Ms. Avnika Mishra, Advocates for RP.

ORDER

(Hybrid Mode)

13.08.2025: This appeal has been filed by the three Appellants.

Appellant No.1 & 2's, case is that they have registered sale deed in their

favour which was executed in 2018, whereas Appellant no.3 case is that

appellant no.3 approached the Adjudicating Authority seeking the direction to

complete the registration in favour of appellant no.3. The appellant are

aggrieved by the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority dated

07.08.2025 by which order Adjudicating Authority has extended earlier order

dated 22.05.2025 for 15 days. The appellant's case is that corporate debtor

has executed the registered sale deed of shops in favour of appellant nos. 1 &

2 in the year 2018 and the corporate debtor had no title to the shop and

under the orders passed by the Adjudicating Authority on 22.05.2025 as

extended on 07.08.2025, appellants are likely to be evicted by the Resolution Professional by Police Force. Ld. Counsel for the appellant has referred to an

earlier judgment of this Tribunal at page- 109 dated 01.07.2025 where this

Tribunal has disposed of the appeal filed by another appellant challenging the

order dated 22.05.2025. The appellants in the said Company Appeal No.

883/2025 & 868/2025 had claimed that they have title to the shops at same

premises which appeal was disposed of by this Tribunal on 01.07.2025 it is

useful to extract paragraphs 15, 16, 17 & 18 of the judgment which is as

follows:-

"15. In this regard, both the Counsels for the appellant have submitted that till this exercise is undertaken by the RP, the possession of their property may not be taken by him either personally or with the assistance of the police.

16. Keeping in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, at this stage, both the present appeals are hereby disposed of with a direction that in case the appellants in both the appeals approaches the RP of the CD within a period of 15 days from today with all the relevant documents/ original title deeds if not already given, of the premises in their permission. Then the RP shall take a holistic view of the issue involved and decide as to whether the property belongs to the appellant or to the CD.

17. In case, the RP takes a decision that the property does not belong to the appellant then the appellant may take appropriate steps in accordance with law.

18. Till then the RP shall not either take possession of the property alleged to be owned and possessed by the appellants in both the appeals himself or through the police."

2. Appellant's case is that appellants have title deeds, under the orders of

the Adjudicating Authority on 22.05.2025 as extended on 07.08.2025

appellants cannot be evicted since corporate debtor has no title to the shops

2 of 4 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1213 of 2025 and the RP is authorised to take possession of the assets of the corporate

debtor only.

3. We have heard Ld. Counsel for the Appellant and Ld. Counsel

appearing for the Resolution Professional.

4. We see no necessity to issue any notice to Respondent No.2. In the

appeal, appellant nos.1 & 2 has brought on record the photocopy of the

registered sale deed in their favour of the shops which are claimed to be in

the possession of the appellant nos.1 & 2. Ld. Counsel for the respondent

submits that the appellants never approached the RP and never submitted

sale deed documents to the RP and since entire premise were owned by the

corporate debtor the Adjudicating Authority has directed the RP to take

possession and the assets are shown in the balance sheet of the corporate

debtor.

5. We have heard counsel for the parties and perused the records.

6. The order dated 22.05.2025 which has been extended on 07.08.2025

cannot be taken any exception of since the order directed the RP to take

possession of the assets of the corporate debtor. The Appeal No. 883/2025

which was disposed of by this Tribunal on 01.07.2025 was by two shops

owners who claimed title deeds with regard to whom the order was passed.

The Appellant no. 1 & 2 also claims to have registered sale deed of shop in

their possession. In the facts of present case, ends of justice be served in

granting liberty to Appellant nos.1 & 2 to approach the RP by showing

original sale deed as claimed of the year 2018 or certified copy of the sale

3 of 4 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1213 of 2025 deed. The RP may not look into any photocopy of any document submitted by

the appellant with regard to title of the shop. In event the RP who is shown

the documents of the Appellant nos. 1 & 2 only if satisfied that prima facie the

title deeds convey the title to the Appellants, he shall not take any steps to

evict the appellant nos. 1 & 2. In so far as the Appellant no.3, it has already

approached the Adjudicating Authority, we see no reason to entertain the

appeal at the instance of the Appellant no.3. No orders are passed with regard

to appellant no.3 in the present appeal. With these directions, we dispose of

the Appeal.

7. RP submits that 15 days' time granted under the order 07.08.2025 is

expiring on 22.08.2025. In view of the above, we extend the time till

31.08.2025. Appellant Nos.1 & 2 may approach the RP and handover the

documents after obtaining the receipt within three working days from today.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) harleen/NN

4 of 4 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1213 of 2025