TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 308
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Judgment, in the three instant Company Appeals, with an anguished note, as to the manner in which the NCLT has proceeded to pass the Impugned Order, overlooking the implications of the interim order passed by this Appellate Tribunal. It is expected that the Tribunals or Courts, who are lower in hierarchy of judicial system, have to exercise certain sincere level of self-restraint in accordance with the norms settled by Bangalore Declaration, while sitting over or passing any orders, which are contrary to the orders that have already been passed by the Appellate Forums. 2. However, in the instant Company Appeals, the Orders, which are under challenge have been passed by the Learned Adjudicating Authority on the first hearing, without even considering the material on record, and even without recording its rationale finding on them and even without giving an opportunity the opposite side to file any objection to it, which is a matter of deep concern for us, as it reflects upon the judicial propriety and undisclosed concern too. 3. Company appeal, CA(AT)(Ins) No.311/2025 has been filed by Bhalakh Realtors Pvt. Ltd & Another, against the impugned order passed in IA(IBC)/784(CHE)/2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ks to deprive him, the secured financial creator of his security, without complying with the provisions of section 30 of the code, under the garb of the principles of commercial wisdom of the COC. The said appeal CA(AT)(Ins) No.45/2025 is pending adjudication before this Appellate Tribunal. 6. The said order was also challenged by Bhalakh Realtors by filing a Company Appeal, being Company Appeal CA(AT) (CH) (Ins) No.301/2024, on the grounds that the approved resolution plan contains provision for transfer of an area of 8.87 acres to the SRA, though the Appellant had permitted the CD to construct and develop an area limited to 4.33 acres of the said land under the power of attorney dated 02.07.2015. 7. The facts under consideration in the said Company Appeal No.301/2024, were that a Deed of General Power of Attorney, was executed on 02.07.2015 by M/s. M.P. Living Space Private Limited, in favor of Sheltrex Developers Private Limited and certain rights were conveyed in relation to the subject property, for taking action for the purposes of development of the property as described in the schedule there under, the property thus divested, by the said Power of Attorney for developm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any Appeal is where the Appellant puts challenge to the Impugned Order dated 16th July 2024, as rendered by the Learned Adjudicating Authority in IA(IBC)/1729(CHE)/2023 in Company Petition IB/0889/2019. The Appellant contends that, he happens to be an owner of a piece of land in controversy i.e., 8.87 acres, and that while there is no dispute inter se between the parties that out of aforesaid piece of land, for an extent of land having an area of 4.33 acres, which has been described in the attorney of 2nd July 2015, a development right has been conferred upon the Respondent over which there is no cloud as such, the entire 8.87 acres of land has been made part of the Resolution Plan by the Respondent on the basis of the claim that the entire 8.87 acres of land was mortgaged to M/s. RELIGARE the Financial Creditor for the purposes of facilitating the development of the project of Phase-I. It is argued by the Counsel for the Appellant that, taking advantage of the covenants of the Mortgage Deed of 30th March 2016 and its corelated redemption, for the land for 4.33 acres, the Respondent has brought entire 8.87 acres into the ambit of the Resolution Plan which now stands approv....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to pass the following orders: a. To direct the 1st Respondent herein to accept the sum of Rs. 88,000/- as per the approved Resolution Plan; b. To direct the 1st Respondent herein to release the charge over the entire extent of 8.87 Acres of land and hand over the original Title Deeds pertaining to the Chennai Project to the Resolution Applicant; c. Pass any such further or other orders as the Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case thus, render justice". 12. The Applicant to said Application, is the Respondent-1 herein and also Respondent No.2 in the Comp App (AT) (CH) (Ins) No.301/2024 and there would be a deeming presumption that, they had participated in the proceedings of Company Appeal on 22.08.2024, they are in the knowledge of passing of the Interim Order by this Tribunal on 22.08.2024. Even then, they prayed for a direction for Religare Finvest, Appellant herein, to "release the charge over the entire property" i.e., total of 8.87 acres and further and to surrender the title deeds pertaining to the said entire land covered by the mortgage deed. The question ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....that since Bhalakh realtors, in whose favour the interim order was passed by us on 22.08.2024, was not a party to the proceedings and since the dispute before Ld. NCLT was between the appellant, Religare Finvest, and the respondent-1, Sheltrex Homebuyers Welfare Association, NCLT, has proceeded to pass such an order because of the fact that M/s. Religare Finvest was not cooperating with respondents 1& 2 herein and that in the appeal preferred by Religare Finvest against the approved resolution plan, there was no stay, Ld. NCLT proceeded to pass such an order, which it should not have done in the first place. The order passed is having a direct bearing and in derogation to the Interim Order, which had directed to maintain a status quo for the balance land of 4.54 acres, because a surrender of the charge of the land for which there operates a status quo order by an Appellate Forum would amount to nullifying the effect of the said Interim Order dated 22.08.2024. 15. Ld. NCLT should have provided an opportunity of hearing to the other side, for filing of objection, or at least should have sought for solicited clarification from this Appellate Tribunal or from the parties concerned t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is exclusively between the Appellant and the Tribunal, the delay in refiling of the Company Appeal, would stand condoned and IA No.937/2025 would stand allowed. 18. An IA(IBC)/341(CHE)/2025 was preferred by the Resolution Professional under Section 60(5) of the I & B Code, alleging non-implementation of the resolution plan by the SRA, as per plan in respect of the Sheltrex Developers Private Limited. The relief, which was thus claimed therein was to the following effect: - "Under the above facts and circumstances, the Applicant humbly prays that this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to consider and pass order a) Based on above facts on non-implementation of the plan and to give further directions to the Resolution Applicant CSHBWA b) Direct the Resolution Applicant to pay an amount of Rs. 38,40,000/- to Erstwhile RP and authorized signatory of monitoring Committee towards CIRP and other expenses incurred from the time of Filing of resolution plan to till date. c) Direct the Resolution Applicant to pay Rs. 88,500/- as their share of cost towards fees of transaction auditor d) Pass such further or other orders/reliefs as may be deemed f....