Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited Vs Anish Niranjan Nanavaty & Ors. (NCLAT Delhi)
NCLAT Delhi held that bank doesn’t have any jurisdiction to retain the securities [i.e. fixed deposit amount] since Corporate Debtor was not part of any facility against which any amount is due. Thus, retention on ground that there were dues against another Group Company not justified.
Facts- The Corporate Debtor– Reliance Communication Infrastructure Limited opened an FDR in the Appellant Bank on 27.03.2017. On the same date a letter dated 27.03.2017 was written to the Bank by Reliance Communication Infrastructure Limited asking the Bank to mark a lien against the FD, which may be due from us to you, whether singly or jointly with another or others in connection with credit facility provided to them by the Bank.
CIRP against the CD commenced on 25.09.2019 on an application u/s. 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 filed by the State Bank of India. The Interim Resolution Professional vide letter dated 03.10.2019 informed the Appellant that CD is undergoing a CIRP and Bank need not debit, freeze, block, transfer or appropriate any funds from the accounts of the CD. The IRP wrote an email dated 10.07.2020 to the Appellant that CD – Reliance Communication Infrastructure Limited had not obtained any credit facilities from the Appellant, hence, the amount lying in the FD be released within five days. On 30.08.2020, the RP requested to release the funds lying in the FD.
