Tribunal dismisses application, parties estopped, liquidator in control, applicants to cooperate

The tribunal dismissed the application in its entirety, ruling that the related parties were estopped from raising claims and that the liquidator had control over the properties as part of the corporate debtor's liquidation estate. The applicants were directed to cooperate with the liquidator for resolution. The application was dismissed without costs.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Release of statutory electronic and physical books of accounts.
2. Release of 8 generators, 2 alternators, and electrical panels.
3. Release of generators and motors belonging to third-party customers.
4. Release of the General Manager's mobile phone.
5. Release of John Deere spare parts.

Comprehensive, Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Release of Statutory Electronic and Physical Books of Accounts:
The applicants sought the release of their statutory electronic and physical books of accounts to file their Income Tax and Goods and Service Tax Returns. The tribunal noted that the applicants and the Corporate Debtor had common directors and were related parties. The tribunal had previously declared transactions involving these parties as fraudulent and directed the respondents to make good the losses caused to the creditors of the Corporate Debtor. The tribunal found that the applicants were attempting to flout the directions of the previous order, and since they were related parties, they were estopped from raising such claims. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the application for the release of books of accounts.

2. Release of 8 Generators, 2 Alternators, and Electrical Panels:
The applicants requested the release of generators and alternators purchased from third-party vendors. The tribunal observed that the 3rd applicant, who purchased these items, was a related party to the Corporate Debtor. The tribunal emphasized that the related party did not raise any claims over these properties during the adjudication of the Section 66 application. According to Regulation 20 of the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations, the liquidator is not required to keep properties of third parties unless a claim is submitted in 'Form No. G' by such third-party owners. Since no such claim was submitted and the applicants were related parties, the tribunal ruled that the liquidator need not release these properties.

3. Release of Generators and Motors Belonging to Third-Party Customers:
The applicants claimed that the generators and motors belonging to Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL), Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd (FACT), and the Kerala Minerals and Metals Ltd. (KMML) were brought to the factory for repairs and should be released. The tribunal noted that the applicants were related parties to the Corporate Debtor and had not submitted any claims in 'Form No. G' as required by Regulation 20 of the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulations. The tribunal found no merit in the applicants' contention and ruled that the liquidator had already taken possession of the properties, including the said machinery, as part of the liquidation estate of the Corporate Debtor. Therefore, the tribunal dismissed the application for the release of these items.

4. Release of the General Manager's Mobile Phone:
The applicants sought the release of the General Manager's mobile phone. The tribunal did not specifically address this issue in its detailed analysis, but it can be inferred from the overall judgment that since the applicants were related parties and the liquidator had taken possession of all properties within the factory premises, the tribunal found no reason to interfere and grant the relief sought. Consequently, the request for the release of the mobile phone was also dismissed.

5. Release of John Deere Spare Parts:
The applicants requested the release of John Deere spare parts imported by the 1st applicant. The tribunal reiterated that the applicants were related parties to the Corporate Debtor and had not submitted any claims in 'Form No. G' as required by the regulations. The tribunal emphasized that the properties were under the control of the liquidator as part of the liquidation estate of the Corporate Debtor. Therefore, the tribunal dismissed the application for the release of the John Deere spare parts.

Conclusion:
The tribunal, after considering the related party status of the applicants and the previous orders declaring transactions as fraudulent, dismissed the application in its entirety. The tribunal found no merit in the applicants' contentions and ruled that the liquidator had full control over the properties as part of the liquidation estate of the Corporate Debtor. The applicants were directed to cooperate with the liquidator for an early resolution in the matter. The application was dismissed without costs.

---