The Indure Private Limited vs Nilesh Vasantrao Bhorkar
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1185 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
In a CIRP that has been initiated, promoters may not be permitted to operate the bank account of, or otherwise deal with the assets of, the Corporate Debtor; such restraint applies to the promoters as a class regardless of the Appellant's own status. Where the Corporate Debtor's business is to be kept running as a going concern during the insolvency process, a non-promoter director who is a signatory to the bank account may be permitted to operate it for necessary operations, subject to furnishing all transaction details to the Interim Resolution Professional weekly and reporting to the Tribunal, and that signatory is answerable for the bank operations so carried out.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Anant Gupta (Suspended Director) ....Appellant M/s. Indure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Nilesh Vasantrao Bhorkar-Proprietor ...Respondent NB Equipment & Engineering Services For Appellant Mr. Krishnendu Datta, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Ankit Shah, Mr. Prashant Mehta, Mr. Varun Gupta, Mr. Simran Wason, Ms. Lakshita Arora, Mr. Shubham, Advocates. For Respondent Ms. Shradha Agrawal, Advocate for R1.
ORDER
05.10.2023: IA. No. 4634 of 2023:- This Application has been filed by
the Appellant praying for certain clarifications in the order dated 12.09.2023.
The Appeal has been filed against the order admitting Section 9 Application.
We, by our interim order dated 12.09.2023, have stayed the order dated
05.09.2023. Prayer of the Appellant to permit the Corporate Debtor to operate
the Bank account cannot be accepted.
2. In view of the CIRP having been initiated, promoters cannot be allowed
to operate the bank account or to deal with the assets of the Corporate Debtor.
However, to keep the Company as a going concern, we permit non-promoter
Director who is signatory to the Bank account may operate the account and
details of all transactions be furnished to IRP weekly and report may also be
submitted to the Court. We make it clear that for all bank operation, the 2
signatory shall be held responsible and bank operation may be permitted
which is necessary for keeping the company as a going concern. Application
is disposed of accordingly.
3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant is permitted to impleade the IRP as
Respondent No.2. Learned Counsel for the Respondent prays further two
weeks' time to file reply. She is allowed to do so. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed
within one week thereafter.
4. List the matter on 07.11.2023.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Anjali/nn
I.A. No. 4634 of 2023 IN Comp. App. (AT) (Ins.) No. 1185 of 2023
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