Tribunal rejects multiple prayers in case, cites premature issues, disposes application

The tribunal rejected various prayers in the case, including the order of disclaimer of the premises, declaration that the premises are outside the scope of moratorium, disbursement of a claim admitted by the liquidator, refund of the amount collected from a party, payment of commission fee, and service of application copy filed by the liquidator. The tribunal noted that certain issues were premature, sub judice in other courts, or had already been addressed. The tribunal disposed of the application accordingly.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Order of disclaimer of the premises.
2. Declaration that the premises are outside the scope of moratorium.
3. Disbursement of claim admitted by the liquidator.
4. Refund of the amount collected from Vidhan Fashions.
5. Payment of commission fee as per agreement.
6. Return of vacant and peaceful possession of the premises.
7. Service of application copy filed by the liquidator and opportunity to reply.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Order of Disclaimer of the Premises:
The applicant sought an order of disclaimer of the premises at No. 15, Lindsay Street, Kolkata, arguing that the property is burdened with onerous covenants. The tribunal rejected this prayer, stating that the commission agreement dated 13.11.2014, even if taken at face value, does not attribute any onerous covenants to the property itself. The agreement merely imposes a payment obligation on the corporate debtor, which is not sufficient grounds for a disclaimer.

2. Declaration that the Premises are Outside the Scope of Moratorium:
The applicant requested a declaration that the premises are outside the scope of the moratorium. The tribunal noted that the moratorium ended with the order of liquidation dated 29.01.2019. The applicable provision now is section 33(5) of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which governs the initiation or continuation of legal proceedings. Since the applicant has already initiated civil proceedings in other courts, there was no need for this adjudicating authority to grant this prayer, and it was rejected.

3. Disbursement of Claim Admitted by the Liquidator:
The applicant sought disbursement of the claim amounting to Rs. 67,07,118 admitted by the liquidator. The tribunal rejected this prayer, stating that disbursement is not permissible until the liquidation process concludes.

4. Refund of the Amount Collected from Vidhan Fashions:
The applicant requested a refund of the amount collected from Vidhan Fashions. The tribunal rejected this prayer, noting that the issue of ownership and possession of the property is still sub judice before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and the city civil court.

5. Payment of Commission Fee as per Agreement:
The applicant sought an order directing the respondents to pay the commission fee as per the agreement dated 13.11.2014. The tribunal rejected this prayer as premature, noting that the applicant's claim has already been adjudicated and admitted in full. The applicant must wait for the liquidation process to complete for disbursement.

6. Return of Vacant and Peaceful Possession of the Premises:
The applicant requested the return of vacant and peaceful possession of the premises. The tribunal noted that an order dated 12.04.2021 had already directed the liquidator to hand over possession to the person from whom the corporate debtor took possession. Consequently, the liquidator handed over possession to the applicant, making this prayer infructuous.

7. Service of Application Copy Filed by the Liquidator and Opportunity to Reply:
The applicant sought a direction for the liquidator to serve a copy of the application CA (IB) No. 1415/KB/2019 and an opportunity to reply. The tribunal refused this prayer, stating that the applicant should file an intervention petition in the relevant application if they feel entitled to be heard.

Orders:
The tribunal disposed of IA No. 1687/KB/2020 in accordance with the above directions and directed the registry to send e-mail copies of the order to all parties and their counsel. A certified copy of the order may be issued upon compliance with requisite formalities.

---