TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1304
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an assignment. 2. Brief facts necessary to be noticed for deciding this appeal are: 2.1 CIRP against the Corporate Debtor - M/s Nice Projects Ltd. commenced on 12.02.2021. In CIRP of the Corporate Debtor, Committee of Creditors (CoC) was constituted in which the RBL Bank was assigned 9.10% vote share. No resolution plan having approved in the CIRP, the CoC passed resolution to approve the liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. RBL Bank, the Financial Creditor has also voted for liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. 2.2 An I.A. was filed by the Resolution Professional for liquidation. By order dated 30.04.2024, the liquidation order was passed by the Adjudicating Authority appointing Mr. Vivek Parti as Liquidator (Respondent herein). The Liquidator published the public announcement on 18.05.2024. 2.3 RBL Bank issued a notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 on 12.07.2024. Liquidator sent an email to the RBL Bank intimating that liquidation proceeding having commenced no legal action can be taken against the Corporate Debtor as per Section 33 Subsection (5). The RBL Bank on 24.07.2024 informed the Liquidator that they have already issued notice dated 12.07.2024.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... It is submitted that present is a case where it was Liquidator's obligation to inform the Court of the assignment in favour of the Appellant. It is submitted that in event, the Adjudicating Authority condone the delay, as prayed in I.A. No.4469 of 2024, the entitlement to receive amount by Appellant shall substantially affected. 5. Learned counsel for the Liquidator opposing the submission of learned counsel for the Appellant submits that RBL Bank who was holding security interest was statutorily obliged to inform the Liquidator of its decision not to relinquish its security interest which having not been communicated within thirty days from order of liquidation dated 30.04.2024, there is presumption that asset is part of the liquidation estate. The Assignment Agreement itself mentions about the pendency of C.P. No. (IB) 3042/ND/2019 against the Corporate Debtor, hence, it was duty of the Appellant to take steps. The Liquidator has already challenged the issuance of Section 13(2) notice by filing an application before the Adjudicating Authority and was contesting the right of the RBL Bank to issue any notice under Section 13(2). It is submitted that the assets which were secur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (a) as much towards the amount payable under clause (a) and sub-clause (i) of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 53, as it would have shared in case it had relinquished the security interest, to the liquidator within ninety days from the liquidation commencement date; and (b) the excess of the realised value of the asset, which is subject to security interest, over the amount of his claims admitted, to the liquidator within one hundred and eighty days from the liquidation commencement date: Provided that where the amount payable under this sub-regulation is not certain by the date the amount is payable under this sub-regulation, the secured creditor shall pay the amount, as estimated by the liquidator: Provided further that any difference between the amount payable under this sub-regulation and the amount paid under the first proviso shall be made good by the secured creditor or the liquidator, as the case may be, as soon as the amount payable under this sub-regulation is certain and so informed by the liquidator. (3) Where a secured creditor fails to comply with sub-regulation (2), the asset, which is subject to security interest, shall ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd proper." 11. From the prayers made by the RBL Bank in I.A. No.4469 of 2024. It is clear that the RBL Bank was praying for condonation of 56 days' delay in communicating its intention to not to relinquish its Secured Asset i.e. Commercial Unit Bearing No. 201, 2nd Floor and further sought for direction to the Liquidator to handover the physical possession of the secured asset. The above pleading indicated that the secured assets were never in the possession of the RBL Bank whose possession was sought. According to own case of the Appellant, Appellant received assignment from the RBL Bank on 27.12.2024, which Assignment Agreement dated 27.12.2024 has also been brought on the record which has been registered and certificate has been issued in April, 2025, which has been filed as Annexure A-5. From the certificate which has been annexed along with the Assignment Agreement it is clear that the certificate was issued by Registering Offer on 07.05.2025, which is at page 217 of the paper book. 12. The impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority has dismissed the application in default, however, after noticing the prayers made in the application, the Adjudicating Authority ....