AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1348
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Code, 2016 (for short 'Code') against the impugned order dated 01.07.2025, passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in IA No. 2341 of 2025 moved in CP No. 178 of 2021 whereby the aforesaid IA was dismissed by the tribunal. 2. Necessary facts required for disposal of this appeal are that Insolvency process against DSK Southern Projects Pvt. Ltd. (CD) was initiated by Ld. NCLT, Mumbai vide order dated 09.12.2021 passed in CP (IB) No. 178 of 2021 and during the course of the Insolvency Resolution, a resolution plan submitted by the consortium of Shiv Charan, Bharti Agarwal, and Pushplata Bai, Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA) was approved by the CoC as well as by Ld. NCLT vide order dated 17.02.2023 and the appellant b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der dated 14.02.2019 of provisional attachment will continue and the aforesaid SLP filed by the ED is still pending for disposal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 8. It is in the 13th meeting of the monitoring committee of the CD which was held on 28.03.2025 the appellant requested for issuance of no objection certificate for aforesaid flat no. 2402 which has not been allegedly attached by the ED and thereafter IA No. 2341 of 2025 was filed by the appellant before NCLT seeking directions of the release of the said flat which has been dismissed by passing the impugned order. 9. The Respondent STCI Finance Ltd. (Financial Creditor) in his reply filed before adjudicating authority has narrated all the factual matrix from filing of the re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that Rs. 8.34 Crore to be paid by SRA within 90 days of the date of approval of resolution plan by the LD. NCLT and the balance amount of Rs. 19.60 Crore to be paid after removal of the attachment of the property by ED by three equal quarterly payment of Rs. 6.53 Crores from 30th day of removal of attachment. The appellant (SRA) has deposited the first instalment in accordance with the provisions contained in the plan. 14. It is also evident that Hon'ble Bombay High Court vide order dated 01.03.2024, passed in writ petition no. 9943 of 2023 filed by the appellant and writ petition no. 29111 of 2023 filed by the ED has held that the attachment by the ED over the attached properties of the CD has come to an end on 17.02.2023 by virtu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....15. The appellant has also brought on record the provisional attachment order passed by the ED on 14.02.2019 whereby apart from other properties of the CD, the following properties given at S. No. 15 of the schedule, description of properties attached by the ED has been given. Sr. No. Name of owner Place where property is situated Nature of property Description of the property Area Document details Value Rs. In lakhs Remark s 15. D.S. Kulkarni Developers Ltd. Bannerghatta Road, Bangalore Units (Flats) of a Mantri- DSK Pinnacle Projects. 14 unsold flats on Katha no. 2., Hulimavu Village, Begur Hobli, Bangalore Area =52915 SqM 52915 Sq. Feet 3244.00 For the attachment Ready Reckoner....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....17. It is apparent that Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 12.08.2024, has only directed for continuance of the provisional attachment order passed by the ED on 19.02.2024 and prima facie it is evident from the record that the flat no. 2402 situated at floor no. 24 admeasuring 3595 sq. feet (4 BHK) in Mantri Pinnacle, Bannerghatta Road, Bengaluru pertaining to which a prayer has bene made for release did not find place in the list of properties attached by the aforesaid provisional attachment order. However, the adjudicating authority by passing the impugned order observed as under: "6. It is noticed that the release of the attachment by Ed is crucial for the implementation of the Resolution Plan, which depends upon the fin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent and the ball has been placed in the court of the Respondent while it was the utmost duty of the adjudicating authority to adjudicate on the issue as to whether the aforesaid property was actually provisionally attached by the ED vide and if the property is found to be under attachment vide order dated 14.02.2019 the attachment of it was obviously protected by the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 12.08.2024 passed in SLP (C) diary no. 34194 of 2024. However, if the property was not found attached by the ED vide order dated 14.02.2019 it was within the jurisdiction and power of the adjudicating authority to release the same in favour of the appellant, as the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide above order has only continued the provisional....