AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 1166
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is case are that Bank of India filed an application under Section 7 of the Code for the resolution of its debt against Housing Development and Infrastructure Ltd. (CD). The Application was admitted on 20.08.2019 and Respondent No. 1 was appointed as the IRP and later on confirmed as the RP. 3. During the pendency of the CIRP proceedings, Respondent No. 1 filed I.A No. 3781 of 2023 in which the following prayers were made:- a) To declare that the Corporate Debtor HDIL has the right to receive 55% of the total sale receivables from the development carried out at the said Property being all that piece and parcel of land admeasuring about 100 acres in Survey No. 57, Village Shamsguda, now known as Balanagar Mandai, Ranga Reddy District, Telengana; b) to order and declare that the rights granted to Respondent Nos. 3 by virtue of the (i) Development Agreement cum General Power of Attorney dated 18 May 2023; and (ii) Development Agreement cum General Power of Attorney dated 18 May 2023 are subject to /subservient to the rights of the Corporate Debtor over the said Property; c) To order and direct the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 that 55% of any revenue generated fr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....executed between Respondent No. 2 and Respondent No. 3 during the pendency of the instant Application; e) Direct Ld. Resolution Professional to file Lis Pendens/ Application/u/s 52 of the Transfer of Property Act before the competent authority; f) Direct Ld. Tahsildar, Balanagar Mandal, Kukatpalli, Medchal-Malkajgiri District to cancel the DGPA no- 1/2023 & 2/2023 dated 18.05.2023; g) Direct the District Magistrate to grant instruction to District Revenue Officer to restrict future sell-purchase and not to change nature of the land; and h) Grant an ex-parte ad interim order in terms of prayer (d) above. 5. In both the applications, it was argued that parcel of land admeasuring 100 acres situated at Survey No. 57, Village Shamsguda (now known as Balanagar Mandal), Ranga Reddy District, Telangana (herein referred to as 'the Property') was owned by the Appellants. 6. The Appellants entered into an agreement to sell dated 19.12.2006 and Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) on the same day with CD. The Appellants agreed to sell an area of 26 acres out of the property for a sum of Rs. 39 Cr. Thereafter, a deed of sub-division dated 16.02.2012 was execut....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er se termination of the JVA or any correspondence thereof. Therefore, we deem it fit to say that the rights and interest of the Corporate Debtor under the said agreements subsist in its real essence. 26. However, we refrain from adjudication of the same since these issues surrounding the JVA are not due to or related to the insolvency of the Corporate Debtor. We also note that prayer 'a' and 'c' of the RP in IA/3781/2023 are declaratory in nature. We are of the view that the issues raised by the Respondents as well as the illustrative references given in Paras 17, 19, 20 and 24 are such which requires elaborate evidence and detailed examination and interpretation of the said agreements and to determine the extent of the rights of the parties under the said agreements. Moreover, the said JVA was executed before the initiation of CIRP of the Corporate Debtor and dispute relating thereto has also not triggered due to or during the insolvency of the Corporate Debtor considering the deeds of cancellation dated 07.04.2024. 28. Thus, based on the facts and circumstances in the present case, we are of considered view that the JVA agreement and the subsequ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Corporate Debtor. Similarly, the Assignment Agreement dated 16.08.2018 has been signed by Respondents 1 and 2 as 'Confirming Party' and they cannot take a u-turn at this stage. There is nothing on record to show that any notice of repudiation or termination of JV Agreement dated 26.09.2015 was given by the Respondent No. 1 and 2 prior to initiation of corporate insolvency of the Corporate Debtor. In our view, Respondents could not have terminated the JV agreement dated 26.09.2015 executed with the Corporate Debtor during subsistence of the moratorium. 45. In view of the Deed of cancellation executed by Respondents 1 & 2, we are not called upon to decide further as to what are the rights, title and interests of the parties under various agreements. Suffice to say that the rights, title and interests of the Corporate Debtor arising out of the JV Agreement dated 26.09.2015 and Assignment Agreement 16.08.2018 continue to subsist in favour of the Corporate Debtor. 46. Accordingly, the interim protection granted vide order dated 08.11.2023 is made absolute till approval of the Resolution Plan by this Tribunal. 13. The Impugned order was assailed, inter alia,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... between both the members. 8. Let the affidavit be filed within a week with advance copy to the Respondent. 9. The Respondent may file their counter within a week thereafter. Adjourned to 18th July, 2025. 15. Apropos the aforesaid order, the Appellant filed the affidavit of Prithviraj B Salgar dated 09.07.2025 in which it has been mentioned that the impugned order deserves to be set aside for the following two reasons which are reproduced as under:- "8. The impugned judgment deserves to be set aside inter alia for the following reasons: i.) The rationale of both the Hon'ble Technical and Judicial Members is completely contrary to each other. While the Hon'ble Technical Member's judgment holds that the matter cannot be decided under the summary procedure under the IBC and is required to be gone into before an appropriate and competent court and therefore, no interim order has been granted by the Hon'ble Technical Member; the Hon'ble Judicial Member confirms the interim order and makes it absolute. ii.) Both the Hon'ble Technical and Hon'ble Judicial Members have signed both the judgments in as much as both t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ers passed by the Technical Member as well as the Judicial Member though separately passed but the conclusion drawn by both of them is the same. It is also submitted that the order contained in para 46 of the impugned order regarding interim protection is the order passed by both the members. Counsel for the Respondents have also submitted that both the members are ad-idem with the cancellation of development agreements on 07.04.2024 and thus the prayer made in both the applications qua execution of the said agreement had become infructuous. It is submitted that there is no merit in the appeal which calls for any interference by this Court much less for referring the matter to the President of the NCLT in terms of Section 419(5) r/w Rule 60(3). 19. We have heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance. 20. From the narration of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, one fact is clear to us that there was an interim order granted by the Tribunal on 08.11.2023. It is also apparent that both the members have written their own judgments. The Judicial Member while writing his judgment has not said that he is concurring with the judgment rendered b....