TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 1072
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n this Appeal to the Impugned Order dated 24.03.2021, passed by the Learned Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi) in I.A. 951/2021 in CP No. (IB) 455(PB)/2017, whereby the Adjudicating Authority has dismissed the Application imposing costs of Rs.1,00,000/- to be paid to the 'Corporate Debtor Company'. 2. Succinctly put, I.A. 951/2021 was filed by M/s. DD Real Estate Private Limited/the Appellant herein which is the Holding Company of M/s. Forgings Private Limited/the 'Corporate Debtor' against the Liquidator, the 'Financial Creditor' (Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd.), the SRA (Mars Infraengineering Private Limited), the Municipal Corporation Faridabad/MCF seeking a direction to the Liquidator to get fresh valuation conducted for the land sold to the bidder under Regulation 35(2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, (Regulation Process) Regulations, 2016, whereby valuers were appointed for ascertaining the value of the land of the 'Corporate Debtor'. The 'Corporate Debtor' is the owner of the land admeasuring 42,773.5 sq. yds. located at 12/6 Village Sarai Khawaja, main Mathura Road, Faridabad, Haryana and comes within the li....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons raised in these Appeals, in regard to valuation of land and Sale Notice. 43. So far as, the imposing cost of Rs.50,000 is concerned Ld. Adjudicating Authority in Para 39 of the impugned order assigned the reasons that efforts made by the Appellant Karan Gambhir is only to delay the Liquidation Process without any basis and indulge in the baseless litigation endlessly. Therefore, imposed a cost of 850,000. We find no ground to interfere in this order." (Emphasis Supplied) 4. Subsequently, in the Impugned Order, the Adjudicating Authority while imposing cost of Rs.1,00,000/- noted as hereunder: "Mr. Karan Gambhir, who is none other than the family member of Gambhirs filed an appeal before Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is not the case of this applicant and that he was not present before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. This company was very much present through its people before National Company Law Tribunal, Hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal and the Hon'ble Supreme Court. This applicant company holding 99% of shareholding of the corporate debtor from time to time kept on changing its stand, before one forum it says it is agriculture land, when the same financial c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Faridabad to the liquidator cannot be construed as material before this bench to consider this land is industrial in nature. This Bench in the earlier round gave sufficient opportunity to the promoter group to substantiate their submissions to prove that land is industrial in nature, but nothing happened. When this issue came up before Hon'ble Supreme Court on 05.11.2020, the applicant counsel has stated that the prospective bidder have indicated that they would require reasonable time to complete due diligence over which the counsel appeared on behalf of the liquidator has categorically mentioned that liquidator has no objection to permit the inspection of documents in his possession, and in fact the liquidator filed an affidavit before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India stating that the details of the property and all information was made available to the promoters to provide it to the interested bidders. The Honourable Supreme Court ordered MCF to place its affidavit, the Hon'ble Supreme Court looking at the affidavit filed by MCF; it has dismissed the appeals on 12.01.2021. This promoter group had already run one round of litigation and failed to get any relief. In the earlie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proves that the land was converted from agricultural to industrial. The valuer chosen by R-1, in his revaluation, has stated the fair value of the land to be approximately Rs.150Crs./- and the Liquidation Value of the land to be 105.45Crs./- subsequently vide Order dated 12.01.2021, the Hon'ble Supreme Court refused to interfere with the Order of this Tribunal. MCF was not party before this Tribunal and therefore occasion for this Tribunal to look into the stand taken by MCF before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Affidavits and subsequent communication from MCF is fresh evidence. The Hon'ble Supreme Court had dismissed the Civil Appeal in limini, but did not reject the Affidavit of MCF which was filed before it as false and irrelevant and therefore it has to be construed that the land is 'Industrial' in nature and hence the value of the same is more than what has been ascertained by R-1. 7. It is contended that R1/Liquidator is selling the land at a very low valuation price which is unfair. 8. Learned Counsel for the Liquidator submitted that the Adjudicating Authority has rightly given a finding that the issue has attained finality with the Order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 9.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that there is no substance in the objections raised in these Appeals, in regard to valuation of land and Sale Notice. 43. So far as, the imposing cost of Rs. 50,000/- is concerned Ld. Adjudicating Authority in Para 39 of the impugned order assigned the reasons that efforts made by the Appellant Karan Gambhir is only to delay the Liquidation Process without any basis and indulge in the baseless litigation endlessly. Therefore, imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000/-, We find no ground to interfere in this order." 10. Challenging this Order, Mr. Karan Gambhir and the Appellant herein has preferred Civil Appeal Nos. 3103-3104/2020 which have been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Order dated 12.01.2021 observing as follows: "1. We are not inclined to interfere with the order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal dated 17 August 2020 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 1420 and 1430 of 2019. 2. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. 3. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of." 11. The issue raised by the Learned Sr. Counsel 'regarding the issue of land use', has already attained finality right upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Learned Adjudicating Au....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... mention here that aforesaid letter issued vide memo no. FCA(T)-Supdt.-78/7935-38 dated 18.12.1978, has been verified from the original dispatch register to corroborate the document provided by the HSVP. The perusal of the relevant entry of the dispatch register would shoe that the said letter was issued to M/s. Forgings Pvt. Ltd., 12/6, Sec. 27-C, Mile Stone, Faridabad and other concerned offices. 9. It is pertinent to mention here that the CLU permission was issued by the then Chief Administrator Faridabad Complex Administration Faridabad was subject to deposit of the amount of Industrial Area Development Cess with the Haryana Development Authority Faridabad but the record does not indicate that whether this condition was fulfilled or not. Infact, the authority who can ascertain this fact is the Haryana Urban Development Authority, Faridabad now known as Haryana Shehari Vikas Pradhikaran (HSVP). 10. That deponent submits that since the original record of the Forging Pvt. Ltd. is not available in this Corporation, therefore, the record so provided by the Administrator, HSVP reveals that Municipal Corporation Faridabad vide memo no. 1928 dated 16.12.2002 asked M/s. Forging Pvt.....