Expired lease cannot be treated as a corporate debtor asset, limiting the Resolution Professional's possession rights.

A Resolution Professional's power to take possession under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code extends only to assets in which the corporate debtor has subsisting ownership rights, and not to property excluded by the statutory explanation as a third-party asset or one held under contract. Where a tea estate lease had expired by efflux of time under the Transfer of Property Act, the corporate debtor retained no surviving ownership right in the estate. On that basis, the Resolution Professional could not claim possession and control of the tea estate through the insolvency process, and the claim for handing over possession was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Resolution Professional could claim possession and control over the tea estate as an asset of the corporate debtor after expiry of the lease.

Analysis: The entitlement under section 18(1)(f) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 extends only to assets over which the corporate debtor has ownership rights, and the statutory explanation excludes assets owned by a third party or held under contractual arrangements. The lease of the tea estate had run its course and determined by efflux of time under section 111(a) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. In that situation, the corporate debtor had no surviving ownership right in the tea estate, and the Resolution Professional could not seek its possession under the insolvency process.

Conclusion: The claim for handing over possession of the tea estate was rejected and the application failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A Resolution Professional can take control only of assets in which the corporate debtor has subsisting ownership rights, and a lease that has expired by efflux of time does not create such a right.

---