Case Law Details
Jhanvi Rajpal Automotive Pvt. Ltd Vs R.P. of Rajpal Abhikaran Pvt. Ltd (NCLAT Delhi)
NCLAT Delhi held that an application by the Resolution Professional under section 60(5) of IBC, 2016, to direct the tenant to vacant the property of Corporate Debtor, permissible for carrying out the duties entrusted to the IRP under Section 18 of the Code.
Facts- This Appeal has been filed challenging the Order dated 11.11.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Indore Bench) by which Order, Application filed by the Insolvency Professional and Chairman of the Monitoring Committee of the Corporate Debtor seeking direction to the Appellant to vacate the premises belonging to the Corporate Debtor in his possession has been allowed. The Appellant being aggrieved by the order impugned has come up in this Appeal.
Conclusion- As per section 18(1)(f)(ii) of IBC, it is a duty of the Interim Resolution Professional to take control and custody of the assets that may or may not be in possession of the Corporate Debtor. For carrying out the duties entrusted to the IRP under Section 18 of the Code and those entrusted on RP under Section 25, the IRP/RP can very well take recourse to Section 60.
When the Corporate Debtor has the ownership rights over the premises which premises can be taken in control by IRP/RP, we are of the view that for eviction of the Appellant especially in event when lease in favour of the Appellant has come to an end, filing a suit is not contemplated in the statutory scheme contained in IBC.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
