AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (3) TMI 526
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or R2 to R4. Mr. Somesh Dhawan, Mr. Gaurav Nair and Ms. Kritya Sinha, Advocates for R5. JUDGMENT JUSTICE JARAT KUMAR JAIN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) The Appellants/ Petitioners filed this appeal against the impugned order dated 28th November, 2019 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the "NCLT"), Mumbai Bench, Mumbai in Miscellaneous Application No. 3779 of 2019 and Miscellaneous Application No. 3293 of 2019 in Company Petition No. 488 of 2019. 2. The Appellants herein filed Company Petition against the Respondents under Sections 241, 242 & 245 of the Companies Act, 2013. In Company Petition, the Appellants/ Petitioners have filed a Miscellaneous Application No. 3779 of 2019. NCLT has decided the ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gainst Respondent Nos. 2 to 7 herein for the following interim reliefs: "(a) Allow the present Miscellaneous Application; (b) Restrain Respondent Nos. 2 to 7 by themselves, or through their servants, agents and assigns or any person claiming through or under them from in any manner dealing with, or disposing of, or dispossessing, or parting with the possession of, or alienating, or encumbering, or altering the status or condition of any of the assets of Respondent No.1; (c) In the alternative to prayer clause (b) above, Respondent Nos.5 to 7 be directed to give the Applicants with a 14 (fourteen) days' notice prior to, in any manner, dealing with, or disposing of, or dispossessing, or parting with the possession o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tor for the loan advanced to the respondent company and thereafter in view of the default committed by the Corporate Debtor, they are exercising their rights as secured creditor. It is also on record that the respondent No.5 i.e. J.M. Financial Services is a Secured Creditor and the properties are mortgaged in their name. however, the contention raised by the petitioner is that the value of which the properties are being sold is far lower than the market value and if they get a chance to sell this property at better value they can sell it on a higher price hence an opportunity may be offered to them. The Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.5 in this Application has fairly agreed for the same and he is re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed with them. 9. From bare reading of the 'Mortgaged Deed', it is apparent that the mortgaged properties were in the possession of the Company. As per Section 59 of the 'Transfer of Property Act, 1882', without the consent of the Company i.e. Respondent No.1, Creditor i.e., 'J.M. Financial Services' has no authority to sell the Company's properties. 10. It is also submitted that some properties have been sold by the 'J.M. Financial Services' even after filing of the Company Petition. NCLT has not given finding on this issue which is material and goes to the root of the case. 11. It is also submitted that there is collusion between the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 and 'J.M. Financial Services' and their actions are against the interest of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to purchase the mortgaged properties at a higher rate. 18. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.5 'J.M. Financial Services' submits that they have fairly agreed before the NCLT that if the Appellant brings a buyer with a better price then it would be beneficial for them also. They are interested only in their loan amount and not interested in selling the mortgaged properties. 19. It is also submitted that they are not the party in the Company Petition and the Appellants should have filed the application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. 20. It is further submitted that this is a consent order hence, in view of sub-section (2) of Section 421 of the Companies Act, 2013, the appeal is not maintainable. 21. Having considered the ....