Sumati Suresh Hegde & Ors. Vs Anand Sonbhadra (NCLAT Delhi)
NCLAT Delhi held that application under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is only maintainable if the issue involved is related to insolvency resolution process. Also held that the NCLT cannot exercise its jurisdiction over matters dehors the insolvency proceedings.
Facts- This appeal is directed against the order dated 05.04.2024, passed by the National Company Law Tribunal by which an application under Section 60(5) read with Section 25(2)(a) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2026 by the Resolution Professional (RP) of M/s Champalalji Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor) against the present Appellants (Predecessor in interest of Late Shri Suresh Padmanabhan Hegde) for a direction to handover the control and custody of the property belonging to the Corporate Debtor, has been allowed.
Conclusion- Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. has held that the NCLT cannot exercise its jurisdiction over matters dehors the insolvency proceedings since such matters would fall outside the realm of IBC.
Held that it is also otherwise well settled that once a tenant always a tenant unless the status changes by contract or by operation of law and in this regard reference may be had to the decision of MR Sahni, M/s Jagdambey Builders Pvt. Ltd. and Vishal N. Kalsaria. The Application under Section 60(5) of the Code is only maintainable if the issue involved is related to insolvency resolution process in view of the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Embassy Property Development P. Ltd. and Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited. Thus, looking from any angle, the decision of the Tribunal is found to be patently erroneous and thus the same is liable to be set aside.
