2025 (3) TMI 1608

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dated 01.06.2022 passed by NCLT, Jaipur by which certain directions have been issued against the appellant in CP No.156/241-242/JPR/2020. The said directions are as under:- I. It is directed that Respondent No.1 i.e. Mr Basant Kumar Goyal, for himself and other members of his group, shall open a fixed deposit account of Rs.5 crores for a period of 6 months, extendable quarterly, and lien shall be marked thereon for encashment only upon orders of the Tribunal, receipt whereof shall be furnished to the Deputy Registrar of the NCLT to be kept in custody. II. It is directed that the Escrow account of shares under control of the Escrow Agents, i.e. Mr. Suresh Sharma and Mr. Sudhir Bhansali, shall remain frozen till further orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bsequently, by Appellate Court it was stayed. Mr. Amol Vyas, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent is further permitted to make correction in the reply which was earlier filed in compliance with the earlier order of this Tribunal. Heard Mr. Ankur Rastogi, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant and Mr. Amol Vyas, Ld. Counsel, for the Respondent. Mr. Amol Vyas, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent tried to persuade the court that there is no error in the impugned order for granting any interim relief to the appellant. He tried to persuade the court that dispute in between the parties is going on since long and he tried to satisfy the Tribunal that the appellants were rightly directed by the tribunal to open a fixed deposit of Rs. Five Crore. In a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appeal 'For Hearing' on 28.08.2023. 3. The order dated 15.05.203 was challenged by the Respondent herein by way of Civil Appeal No. of 2023 (@ Diary No.30435 of 2023) titled as Pawan Kumar Goyal & Ors Vs Mentor Home Loans India Ltd & Ors before the Hon'ble Apex Court. The appeal was dismissed with the following order: "Delay condoned. We do not find any good ground and reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and hence, the appeal is dismissed. However, we clarify that the impugned judgment and dismissal of the present appeal will not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. It will be open to the appellants to press for an early hearing of the C.P. Nos. 156/241-242/JPR/2....