NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

NEW DELHI

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 323 of 2018

IN THE MATTER OF:

M/s. Navbharat Castings LLP.

…Appellant

Versus

M/s. Moser Baer India Ltd. & Anr.

…Respondents

Present:

For Appellant :

Mr. Prashnto Sen, Mr. R.K. Bansal, Ms. Isha Bhalla

and Mr. Kamal Budhiraja, Advocates

O R D E R

30.07.2018

The appellant has challenged the order dated 8^th May, 2018

whereby and whereunder the application preferred by the appellant (landlord)

for direction to the ‘Corporate Debtor’ through the ‘Resolution Professional’ to

vacate the premises belonging to the decree holder has been rejected in view of

the order of moratorium passed.

2.

On 29^th June, 2018, this Appellate Tribunal passed the following order :-

“The question arises for consideration in this appeal

is whether the order of ‘Moratorium’ will be applicable to

the lease hold property of a land-lord in which the

‘Corporate Debtor’ is a tenant, particularly after decree

of eviction passed in favour of the land lord against the

‘Corporate Debtor’. In this respect, one may notice the

provision of Section 14(1)(d) of the Insolvency and

Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which reads as follows:

2

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 323 of 2018

“14.

Moratorium.─ (1) Subject to provisions of sub-

sections (2) and (3), on the insolvency commencement

date, the Adjudicating Authority shall by order declare

moratorium for prohibiting all of the following, namely:—

(a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits

or proceedings against the corporate debtor including

execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court

of law, tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority;

(b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of

by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal

right or beneficial interest therein;

(c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security

interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its

property including any action under the Securitisation

and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement

of Security Interest Act, 2002;

(d) the recovery of any property by an owner or lessor

where such property is occupied by or in the possession

of the corporate debtor.”

2.

However, just to give an opportunity to the

counsel for the Appellant, we adjourn the case.”

3.

On hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and in view of sub-clause

(1) of clause (d) of Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the

recovery of property by the owner occupied by the ‘Corporate Debtor’ is not

permissible during the period of moratorium.

4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the

‘Corporate Debtor’ through ‘Resolution Professional’ should pay current rent for

3

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 323 of 2018

the period of moratorium as the ‘Corporate Debtor’ is occupying the premises.

However, such issue has not been raised before the Adjudicating Authority. Let

the appellant bring such fact before the ‘Resolution Professional’ or the

‘Adjudicating Authority’, who may consider the same.

5.

It was then contended that the period of moratorium is coming to an end

on 15^th August, 2018 thereafter the appellant has right to pursue for recovery of

arrears of rent. We don’t express any opinion in this regard as such issue can

be decided by the court of competent jurisdiction.

6.

The appeal stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation. No cost.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya]

Chairperson

[ Justice Bansi Lal Bhat ]

Member (Judicial)

/ns/sk/