The court directed the National Company Law Tribunal to adjudicate on whether the petitioners' properties are part of the liquidation estate, affirming that ownership claims must be resolved before proceeding with liquidation.

JUDGMENT :

VIJU ABRAHAM, J.

1. Petitioners have approached this Court seeking a direction restraining the 2^nd respondent Tribunal from proceeding further with the Liquidation proceedings in CP(IBA)/11/KOB/2020 as against the properties of the petitioners covered by Exts.P1 to P16. Petitioners have also sought for a direction to the 2^nd respondent Tribunal to first take up, consider, and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P31, the application filed by the petitioners challenging the maintainability of the liquidation proceedings in CP(IBA)/11/KOB/2020 on the file of the NCLT, Kochi in respect of their properties before proceeding further with any steps in the liquidation process that concern or relate to the petitioners' properties covered by Exts.P1 to P16.

2. Petitioners submit that they are the absolute owners of the property having an extent of 5.86 Acres of land covered by Ext.P1 to P16 title deeds. The Corporate Debtor has availed a loan facility of Rs.10 Crores from Federal Bank Limited. Upon default in repayment of the loan, Federal Bank Limited initiated proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 by filing IBA/11/KOB/2020 before the NCLT, Kochi Bench. The application was admitted for initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor, appointing the Interim Resolution Professional to carry out the functions as mentioned under the Code. Later, the NCLT by Ext.P18 order initiated liquidation proceedings against the Corporate Debtor, and the Tribunal appointed the 3rd respondent as the Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor. The specific contention raised by the petitioners is that they are not the corporate debtors, and the subject properties are not part of the corporate debtor's assets. However, the 3rd respondent is entertaining and processing applications as though the said properties belong to the corporate debtor. As the petitioners are not corporate debtors, the Liquidator has no right whatsoever to take any coercive steps against the said third-party properties as part of the liquidation process. It is further submitted that certain third parties have preferred claims before the 3rd respondent and also filed applications before the 2nd respondent Tribunal under Section 60 (5)(c) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking directions to execute and register sale deeds in respect of the petitioners' property, as if the said land forms part of the liquidation estate of the corporate debtor. The specific case of the petitioners is that they have not executed any agreement, instrument, or document transferring, assigning, creating, or incorporating any right, title, or interest in the subject property in favour of any person, including the corporate debtor, and therefore, the subject property cannot form part of the liquidation estate within the meaning of Section s 36 (3) and 36(4) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Petitioners would contend that, in the absence of any deed or instrument of assignment or conveyance, the inclusion of the petitioners' property within the liquidation estate is wholly unsustainable and beyond the jurisdictional competence of the National Company Law Tribunal. It is in the said circumstance that the petitioners have filed Ext.P31 I.A.No.266 of 2025 in IBA/11/KOB/2020, challenging the maintainability of the proceedings, asserting that the NCLT has no jurisdiction over third-party properties not forming part of the liquidation estate. It is in the said circumstance that the petitioners have approached this Court.

3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the 3^rd respondent and relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. and another v. Union of India and others, (2