Appellant Ordered to Surrender Property to Resolution Professional: Legal Duties & Authority

The Adjudicating Authority upheld the order for the Appellant to hand over possession of the property to the Resolution Professional, emphasizing the statutory duties of the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and dismissing the appeal, stating there was no merit. The judgment highlighted the legal principles governing agreements without consideration and the IRP's authority to take control of Corporate Debtor's assets.

---

---

Issues:
- Jurisdiction of Adjudicating Authority to pass order
- Validity of Leave and License Agreement
- Obligations of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP)
- Appellant's right to resist possession by IRP

Jurisdiction of Adjudicating Authority:
The appeal was filed against an order passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata, directing the Appellant to hand over possession of immovable property belonging to the Corporate Debtor. The Appellant challenged the jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority, claiming it cannot function as a Civil Court and that the Application filed by the IRP was not maintainable. The Appellant argued they were in possession of the property based on a Leave and License Agreement. The Respondent, representing the Resolution Professional, contended that the Appellant had no right to continue possession as the Agreement was void and unregistered, and the property was mortgaged to banks.

Validity of Leave and License Agreement:
The Appellant relied on a Leave and License Agreement executed without consideration, claiming permission to occupy the property. However, the Agreement was found to be void under Section 25 of the Contract Act, as it lacked consideration and was unregistered. The Adjudicating Authority was mandated to take control of assets owned by the Corporate Debtor, as per Section 18(1)(f) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, even though the Appellant acknowledged the ownership of the property by the Corporate Debtor.

Obligations of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP):
The IRP's duty, as per the IBC, includes taking control and custody of assets owned by the Corporate Debtor. In this case, the IRP sought possession of the property in question, which the Adjudicating Authority directed the Appellant to hand over within a specified timeframe. The Appellant's resistance based on the Leave and License Agreement lacking consideration was not deemed valid, given the statutory obligations of the IRP.

Appellant's right to resist possession by IRP:
The Appellant's defense against surrendering possession was primarily based on the Leave and License Agreement, which was found to be void due to lack of consideration and non-registration. The Adjudicating Authority upheld the order for the Appellant to hand over possession of the property to the Resolution Professional, emphasizing the statutory duties of the IRP and dismissing the appeal, stating there was no merit. The judgment highlighted the legal principles governing agreements without consideration and the IRP's authority to take control of Corporate Debtor's assets.

This detailed analysis of the judgment covers the issues of jurisdiction, validity of agreements, statutory obligations, and the Appellant's right to resist possession, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal reasoning behind the decision.

---