2022 (3) TMI 1665

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Kr. Gupta, for Liquidator and Learned Counsel appearing for the Liquidator. 2. This Appeal has been filed against the Ex-Directors of the Corporate Debtor challenging the Order dated 04.01.2022 of the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, Court-III) passed in IA6014/2021 filed by the Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited-Financial Creditor. 3. In the Liquidation Proceeding of the Corporate Debtor, Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited-Financial Creditor has filed an Application IA-6014/2021 wherein following prayers have been made: "a. The suitable directions to be issued to Respondent for handing over vacant physical possession of 260 sq. yards plot standing in the name of Corporate Debtor under the provisions of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mbolic possession of the 1400 sq. yards. It is further on record that with regard to the measures taken by Bank under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 with regard to 1400 sq. yards an Application under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 has been filed by the Appellant before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT in short) being Application No. 396 of 2019 which is pending consideration before the DRT. 260 sq. yards admeasuring land belonging to the Corporate Debtor is in the liquidation estate and the Application filed by the Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited i.e. I.A. No. 6014 of 2017 where the Bank has requested that Liquidator may give possession of the 260 sq. yards to the Bank so that the said land belonging Corporate Debtor may be sold u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n estate. The Liquidator who is present before us submits that in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case 1400 sq. yards and 260 sq. yards are not separable and sale of composite property can obtain the maximum revenue for the said land and joints sale of the property is material to have more revenue for the property which may be beneficial to the liquidation estate. 7. After considering the submissions which have been made by the Learned Counsel for the Appellant, we are of the view that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, no error can be found with the Order of the Adjudicating Authority directing for composite sale of land of both the parts under the SARFAESI Act, 2002. Even the Liquidator when he sel....