Bank of India V/s Nimit Steel & Alloys Pvt Ltd. - The respondents willfully disobeyed and did not appear before this bench. As it is not possible to pronounce the order in the absence of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2, this Bench hereby issue bailable arrest warrant to the respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

 NCLT Mumbai-III (02.05.2022) in Bank of India V/s Nimit Steel & Alloys Pvt Ltd.  [I.A. 2665/2021, I.A. 2437/2019 IN C.P.(IB)1425/MB/2017] held that;

• The respondents willfully disobeyed and did not appear before this bench. As it is not possible to pronounce the order in the absence of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2, this Bench hereby issue bailable arrest warrant to the respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

Excerpts of the order;

Ms. Prajakta Menezes, counsel appearing for the Liquidator, Mr. Neerave B. Merchant, counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 are present through physical hearing.

 

Despite direction given to the respondents to be present before this bench on 29.04.2022 in the presence of their counsels for passing appropriate order in contempt petition, the respondents willfully disobeyed and did not appear before this bench. As it is not possible to pronounce the order in the absence of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2, this Bench hereby issue bailable arrest warrant to the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to be executed through the Assistant Commissioner Of Police, Ghatkopar West.

 

The Registrar shall communicate the above order to the Assistant Commissioner of Police, 3WQ4+894, Lal Bahadur Shastri Rd, Near Telephone Exchange, Jivdaya Lane, Ghatkopar West, Mumbai, Maharashtra 400086 Ghatkopar within whose jurisdiction the respondents are residing. Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ghatkopar on receiving the above order shall arrest the respondents whose details are furnished hereinunder and produce them before this bench without causing any further delay on any working day during the office hours. List this matter on 06.06.2022.

 

Respondent No. 1

Mr. Akshay Bhansali

Having his address at

603/604, Gayatri Dham Towers,

6th Floor, Derasar Lane, Nr Jain Temple,

Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai 400077

 

Respondent No. 2

Mr. Haresh Bhansali

Having his address at

701/702 Siddhi Apts

Opp. Gurukul High School Tilak Road,

Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai 400077

 

------------------------------------------------------------------

 

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH

COURT III

10. I.A. 2665/2021 I.A. 2437/2019 IN C.P.(IB)1425/MB/2017

CORAM: SHRI. H.V.SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (J)

SHRI CHANDRA BHAN SINGH, MEMBER (T)

ORDER SHEET OF THE HEARING OF MUMBAI BENCH OF THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL ON 29.04.2022

NAME OF THE PARTIES: Bank of India

V/s

Nimit Steel & Alloys Pvt Ltd.

SECTION 7 OF INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016

ORDER

Ms. Prajakta Menezes, counsel appearing for the Liquidator along with Liquidator Amit Gupta, Mr. Mr. Neerav B Merchant, counsel appearing for the Respondent No. 1 and 2 i.e. Mr. Akshay Bhansali and Mr. Haresh Bhansali are present through physical hearing.

 

The matter is listed on board today for physical hearing, at the persistent insistence of the counsel appearing for the liquidator to the effect that the Respondents 1 & 2 Mr. Akshay Bhansali and Mr. Haresh Bhansali respectively, having given an undertaking before this bench on 06.11.2019 to make good the loss of an amount of Rs. 1,70,47,240/- being the amount withdrawn by them during moratorium period did not do so. After hearing the counsel appearing for the Liquidator and upon perusing the material available on record, this bench thoroughly satisfied that the respondents have willfully disobeyed the undertaking and did not comply the same even after a lapse of nearly three years. Today, after briefly hearing the matter, the learned counsel appearing for the Liquidator also brought to the attention of this bench that the Respondents preferred an appeal in Company Appeal No. (18/Insolvency) 154/2020 before the Hon’ble NCLAT which was turned down by the Hon’ble NCLAT vide its order dated 27.01.2020 by confirming the order of this bench. It is also an admitted fact that no further appeal was preferred by Respondents against the order passed by the Hon’ble NCLAT and thus the order and the undertaking given by the Respondents attained finality. Since the Respondents disobeyed their own undertaking, the act of disobedience squarely falls within the act of “Civil Contempt” within the meaning of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, apart from attracting penal provisions under the Code.

 

The Respondents did not express any ready and willingness to honor the undertaking even today before this bench and on the other hand trying to defend as if they have not made such undertaking. Therefore, under these circumstances this bench has no option except to find the Respondents guilty under the contempt of courts Act, 1971 for the act of “Civil Contempt”.

 

Respondents are hereby directed to be present in person before this bench. on 02.05.2022 for passing appropriate order.

 

Registrar is hereby directed to send appropriate requisition to the concerned police authorities to depute at least two constables on 02.05.2022.

 

----------------------------------------------------