Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3.2 He states that Respondent no. 1 acted to the prejudice of the Petitioner and with a view to obstruct the execution of the judgment and decree dated 17.07.2017, wrote a letter dated 15.02.2019 to the Interim Resolution Professional ('IRP') M/S Noida Software Technology Private Ltd.('NSTPL') provoking him to take the possession of the suit premises so as to frustrate the warrants of possession issued by the executing court on 01.02.2019. The IRP in Dena Bank v. NSTPL, acted upon the letter of the Respondent no. 1 and took possession of the suit premises from Respondent no. 1 and his family on 16.02.2019. 3.3 He states that the Petitioner herein was thus, compelled to approach the National Company Law Tribunal ('NCLT') for seeking possession of the suit premises from the IRP. He states that the NCLT vide order dated 18.07.2022 held that the suit premises do not belong to NSTPL and directed Resolutional Professional ('RP') to hand over the possession of the suit premises to the Petitioner. He states that the Respondent no. 1 opposed the Petitioner's plea for handover of possession of the suit premises before the NCLT in the aforesaid proceedings.

"7. Additionally, in this context, I'd also like to state the following:

a. With respect to the suit property, when the Claimant approached the Ld. NCLT, it directed the Petitioner herein to approach the CoC of NSTPL and make a representation to them. The CoC of NSTPL voted against giving them the said property.