ORDER

Per: Cmde. Siddharth Mishra, Member (Technical):

1. This Court is congregated through a hybrid mode.

2. Learned Counsels for all the parties were heard at length.

3. The instant application being I.A. (IB) No. 695/KB/2024, has been preferred by Sanjit Kumar Nayak, the Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Applicant’, against the Respondents, Yes Bank, hereinafter referred to as “Respondent No. 1” and the erstwhile Director of the Corporate Debtor, Gouri Shankar Chatterjee, hereinafter referred to as “Respondent No. 2”, seeking the following reliefs:

a. An order be passed directing Respondent No. 1 to remit Rs. 31, 55,689 (Rupees Thirty-one lakhs, fifty-five thousand, six hundred and eighty-nine only) to the account of the Corporate Debtor.

b. An order be passed restraining Respondent No. 1 from further allowing Respondent No. 2 and/or suspended Board of Directors from operating the Bank Account of the Corporate Debtor maintained with Respondent No. 1.

c. An order be passed directing Respondent No. 1 to act in accordance with the letters dated 26.04.2023 and 27.12.2023.

d. Such other order/orders as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.

4. Factual Matrix:

4.1 This tribunal, on 20.02.2020, passed an order of liquidation against the Corporate Debtor, and appointed Sanjay Kumar Agarwal as the liquidator. Later, this Tribunal, vide order dated 15.10.2020, replaced the erstwhile Liquidator and appointed Mr. Sanjit Kumar Nayak as the liquidator instead.

4.2 On 15.10.2020, the Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta quashed the order of admission of CIRP, and the order of liquidation passed by this Tribunal. However, this order was set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and the Financial Creditor was granted leave to file an appeal before the Hon'ble NCLAT. Later, the Hon'ble NCLAT vide order dated 24.02.2023, upheld the order of admission of CIRP and Liquidation against the Corporate Debtor.

4.3 The Applicant informed Respondent No. 1 of his appointment vide letter dated 26.04.2023. Through the said letter, the Applicant prohibited them from permitting any Director or Employee from operating the bank account of the Corporate Debtor. Further, the Applicant also disallowed any debit transactions from the account of the Corporate Debtor.

4.4 However, the Applicant has ascertained from the Statement of Account provided by Respondent No. 1 that a sum of Rs. 31, 55,689 (Rupees Thirty-one lakhs, fifty-five thousand, six hundred and eighty-nine only), has been debited from the account of the Corporate Debtor.

5. Submissions of the learned Counsel on behalf of the Applicant:

5.1 It is submitted that vide letter dated 26.04.2023, the Applicant informed Respondent No. 1 of his appointment as the Liquidator of the Corporate Debtor and prohibited the Respondent Bank from allowing any of the Directors and/or Employees of the Corporate Debtor from operating the account of the Corporate Debtor maintained by Respondent No. 1. Further, the Applicant also precluded Respondent No. 1 from allowing any debit transactions in respect of any of the bank accounts of the Corporate Debtor.

5.2 It is submitted that the Applicant requested Respondent No. 1 to provide all the Bank statements for the period commencing from 19.08.2019 till date. Despite repeated follow-ups, Respondent No. 1 was reluctant to divulge any information and stated that the letter dated 26.04.2023 was never received by them. The Applicant vide letter dated 15.09.2023, addressed to the Post Master, Salt Lake Post Office, India Post, sought the status of delivery of the said letter, to which the Post Master responded that the letter was delivered on 02.05.2023.

5.3 It is submitted that the erstwhile Directors have entered into a Rental Agreement with NF Forgings Pvt. Ltd on 24.09.2022. Pursuant to the said Agreement, several amounts were deposited by NF Forgings Pvt Ltd to the bank account of the Corporate Debtor maintained with Respondent No. 1, which is