Tribunal Revives BIFR and AAIFR Cases, Orders Duplicate FDRs

The Tribunal allowed the petitioner's request for the revival of BIFR and AAIFR cases, directing the preparation of duplicate FDRs from scanned copies due to the loss of original FDRs. A settlement agreement was reached for the withdrawal and encashment of FDRs, with the amount to be deposited to the secured creditor. Despite challenges in locating the original FDRs and custody issues, the Tribunal disposed of the matter by authorizing the preparation of duplicate FDRs for payment to the respondent.

---

---

Issues:
Revival of BIFR and AAIFR cases, Release of FDRs, Disbandment of BIFR and AAIFR, Settlement agreement for FDRs, Loss of original FDRs, Custody of FDRs, Tracing original FDRs, Preparation of duplicate FDRs.

Revival of BIFR and AAIFR cases:
The petitioner sought revival of BIFR case No. 342 of 2003 and case No. 45 of 2005, along with AAIFR Appeal No. 100 of 2015. The Hon'ble BIFR and AAIFR were disbanded with the promulgation of IBC, 2016, transferring pending matters to the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT).

Release of FDRs:
The petitioner requested the release of FDRs, deposited as per orders from BIFR and AAIFR, to be paid to the secured creditor, respondent No. 3. Despite efforts, the original FDRs were lost in the records. Respondent No. 1 directed respondent No. 2 to locate the FDRs, but they were unsuccessful. Eventually, the Bank was directed to prepare duplicate FDRs from scanned copies for encashment.

Disbandment of BIFR and AAIFR:
The BIFR and AAIFR were disbanded with the introduction of IBC, 2016, necessitating the transfer of pending matters to the Adjudicating Authority (NCLT), leading to challenges in resolving cases like the present one.

Settlement agreement for FDRs:
The applicant and secured creditor, respondent No. 3, reached a settlement for the withdrawal and encashment of FDRs, with the amount to be deposited with respondent No. 3. Efforts were made to locate the FDRs, involving correspondence and directions from various parties.

Loss of original FDRs and Custody of FDRs:
It was contended that the original FDRs were lost in the records, leading to challenges in locating them for encashment. Respondent No. 1 and 2 were indicated to have custody of the FDRs, but efforts to locate them were unsuccessful, necessitating the involvement of the Bank for resolution.

Tracing original FDRs and Preparation of duplicate FDRs:
Despite efforts, the original FDRs could not be traced, leading to the decision to prepare duplicate FDRs from scanned copies for encashment and transfer of the amount to the Bank account of the applicant for payment to respondent No. 3. The Tribunal allowed the application and disposed of the matter accordingly.

---