JUDGMENT

The Liquidator appointed by the National Company Law Tribunal Kochi Bench for the purpose of liquidation of Corporate Debtor Company 'India Techs Limited' has filed this writ petition for lifting Ext.P1 order of attachment passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench (DRT) over the assets now forming part of the Liquidation Estate.

2. The HDFC Bank, the 1st respondent filed O.A.

No.9/2015 before the DRT seeking to recover its dues from India Techs Limited, and the DRT by Ext. P1 order in I.A. No.613 of 2015 restrained India Techs Limited and the respondents 2 and 3 herein, the Managing Director and Director of India Techs Limited from transferring, alienating or otherwise creating any charge or encumbrance or disposing of the scheduled properties therein, or committing any waste or damages thereon, until further orders of the Tribunal.

3. The National Company Law Tribunal, by Ext.P2 order dated 05.03.2021 passed under Section 33 (1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code' for short) directed the petitioner herein to act as Liquidator for the purpose of liquidation of India Techs Limited.

4. Pursuant to Ext.P2 order of liquidation, the petitioner took into his custody item Nos.1 to 6 of the properties owned by the Corporate Debtor described as 'Scheduled Properties' in Ext.P1 order of DRT. However, on verification of the Encumbrance Certificate of the Scheduled Properties, the petitioner noticed that an encumbrance is registered in the revenue records in favour of the 1st Respondent Bank against the scheduled properties pursuant to Ext.P1 order of DRT for an amount of Rs.1.95 Crores.

5. As per Section 36 of the Code, upon liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, all assets owned by the Corporate Debtor shall form part of the Liquidation Estate and shall vest with the Liquidator, which shall include the encumbered assets of the Corporate Debtor under Section 36(3)(b) of the Code. The Liquidator is required to sell the immovable properties and all other assets, for the purpose of liquidation and distribute the proceeds in accordance with Section 53 of the Code. According to the petitioner, Ext.P1 order of attachment and its endorsement on the revenue records will be impediment in bringing in prospective purchasers and maximising the value of the Liquidation Estate in the process of liquidation, which is a time bound process.

6. The petitioner further points out that the Bank had already submitted its claim to the petitioner under Section 18 of Insolvency Bankruptcy Board of India (Liquidation Process) Regulations 2016, and its entire claim of Rs.5,24,12,432.75 (as on 04.03.2021) was admitted by him. The petitioner also relies on Ext.P4 no objection letter dated 18.10.2021 issued by the Bank to the petitioner to proceed with filing of necessary application before the DRT for lifting Ext.P1 attachment order.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner moved an interlocutory application on 25/10/2021 before DRT to lift Ext.P1 order of attachment. Since presently there is no Presiding Officer for the DRT, Ernakulam Bench, the matter could not be heard and the petitioner has thus approached this Court in the light of the order dated 16.12.2021 of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C) No.10911 of 2011 in the matter of State Bar Council v of Madhya Pradesh . Union of India for direction to lift Ext.P1 order of attachment and for direction to respondents 4 and 5 to remove the attachment of properties scheduled in Ext.P1 order from the Encumbrance Record and Revenue Records.

8. Heard Sri. Vinod P.V. the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. B.Jayashankar, the learned counsel for the 1st respondent Bank and Sri.C.N.Prabhakaran, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents 4 and 5. Though notice was issued to respondents 2 and 3 by Special Messenger, there is no appearance.

9. As per Ext.P2 order of the National Company Law Tribunal, the petitioner has been appointed as the Liquidator for the pu