Delhi High Court - Orders
International Asset Reconstruction ... vs Anoop Bishnoi & Ors on 4 August, 2021
Author: Vipin Sanghi
Bench: Vipin Sanghi, Jasmeet Singh
$~8.
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3708/2021
INTERNATIONAL ASSET RECONSTRUCTION
COMPANY LTD. ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, Senior
Advocate with Mr. R.P. Agrawal,
Ms.Manisha Agrawal & Ms. Pragati
Agrawal, Advocates.
versus
ANOOP BISHNOI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pallav Saxena & Mr. Mohammad
Nausheen Samar, Advocates for
respondents No.1 & 2.
Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Aditya Malhotra, Advocate
for the Objector/ Surabhi Family
Trust.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH
ORDER
% 04.08.2021 CM APPL. 24227/2021
1. This application has been filed by the Surabhi Family Trust by reference to Order I Rule 10 CPC for seeking impleadment as a party respondent. The premise on which impleadment is sought is that, vide order dated 23.03.2021, this Court had issued notice to the applicant returnable on 11.05.2021 while directing the Recovery Officer, DRT-I, Delhi to dispose of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:BHUPINDER SINGH ROHELLA Signing Date:06.08.2021 13:34 the objections preferred by the applicant. The objections of the applicant have been disposed of by the Recovery Officer, and the Recovery Officer has returned a finding that the transfer of shares of the defendants in the original application to the applicant Surabhi Family Trust, was invalid.
2. The only purpose of issuing notice to the applicant vide order dated 23.03.2021 was in the light of the directions issued by us for disposal of the objections preferred by the applicant before the Recovery Officer. The applicant was not a defendant before the DRT in the original application. The applicant has an independent remedy against the order passed by the Recovery Officer which - we are informed, has been availed of and the appeal is listed for hearing today.
3. In these circumstances, we are not inclined to implead the applicant as a party respondent in these proceedings.
4. The application is, accordingly, dismissed.
CM APPL. 24216/20215. This application has been moved by the Surabhi Family Trust to seek a direction that the order dated 14.07.2021 - by which this Court directed sale of 14,26,860 shares of Globus Spirit Ltd transferred to the applicant, be kept in abeyance. Our order dated 14.07.2021 reads as follows:
"1. In terms of our order dated 06.07.2021 the Recovery Officer-I, Mr. Rajesh Kumar filed his response to the show cause notice issued to him and he has also appeared. We have perused his response. Mr. Rajesh Kumar at the outset tenders his unconditional apology for the non-compliance of the order dated 23.03.2021 passed by us. He further states that the said non-compliance is not deliberate. He states that he has been posted on deputation with the DRT to serve as Recovery Officer which he joined on 27.05.2021. He has no prior experience in judicial/quasi-judicial work and has limited expertise in dealing Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:BHUPINDER SINGH ROHELLA Signing Date:06.08.2021 13:34 with the judicial orders. He states that he heard arguments on the objections pending before him and he passed the orders on those objections on 05.07.2021 whereby the objections filed by Surabhi Family Trust were dismissed. He has held that the entire 16,19,280 shares including 1,92,960 shares held by Mr. Anoop Bishnoi shall remain attached. He states that due to lack of experience and paucity of time he could not comply with the order passed by this Court on 23.03.2021. He states that the process of sale of 1,92,960 shares shall be undertaken immediately. He states that he has received brokerage quotes from four share brokers/agents out of the ten notices issued and he shall be proceeding further with the sale of the shares in order to comply with the directions of this Court in its entirety. He states that the RC is next listed for hearing on 17.07.2021 and the sale of 1,92,960 shares shall be taken up on the said date. The entire process is likely to be completed within four to six weeks. On our query as to why completion of the sale process is likely to take four to six weeks, considering that the said shares are listed in the stock exchange, he states that since he lacks experience, he would like to ensure that the process is completed without any lacuna.
2. On the other hand, Mr. Malhotra submits that the Petitioner has already placed before the Recovery Officer the complete procedure with regard to sale of the said listed shares and that the Petitioner is willing to assist the Recovery Officer in the said sale process. He further submits that since the Recovery Officer has already passed an order rejecting the objections in respect of the 14,26,860 shares, which were transferred to Surabhi Family Trust, and it has been held that they remain attached, the said shares should also be sold by the Recovery Officer without any delay.
3. We are of the view that since the objections in respect of the said 14,26,860 shares stand rejected, the sale of the entire share holding of 16,19,280 shares should proceed without any delay. In our view, there can be no justification for taking four to six weeks for sale of the said shares since they are listed in the stock exchange. The Recovery Officer shall file the status reports with regard to the progress made in relation to the sale Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:BHUPINDER SINGH ROHELLA Signing Date:06.08.2021 13:34 of the said 16,19,280 shares within two days, to detail as to what progress has been made.
4. List on 16.08.2021 for compliance.
5. On the next date the Recovery Officer shall remain present with the further consolidated status report."
6. Paragraph 3 of the aforesaid order shows that since the objections in respect of the aforesaid shares preferred by the applicant stood rejected, there was no impediment in the sale of the entire shareholding of 16,19,280 shares and, consequently, we directed the Recovery Officer to proceed for the sale and file a status report.
7. The submission of Mr. Sethi - learned senior counsel for the applicant, is that the applicant has preferred an appeal against the order of the Recovery Officer rejecting the objections of the applicant which is listed for hearing before the DRT, and in view of the order dated 14.07.2021, the DRT may not be in a position to decide the appeal on its merits.
8. The said order was passed keeping in view of the fact that there was no impediment in the sale of shares of Globus Spirit Ltd., inter alia, held by the applicant. It is for the appellate authority to take its decision on merits of the applicant's appeal.
9. The application is, accordingly, dismissed.
VIPIN SANGHI, J JASMEET SINGH, J AUGUST 04, 2021 aks Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:BHUPINDER SINGH ROHELLA Signing Date:06.08.2021 13:34