Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + Tri Companies Law - 2019 (9) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 1390 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL — MUMBAI BENCHRecall of Order - operation of locker - wilful defiance of the order - Restraint from mortgaging or creating charge or lien or creating third party interest or in any way alienating, the movable or immovable properties owned by her, including jointly held properties and dealing with securities in any company - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, Ramesh C. Bawa has transferred ₹ 4.84 crores on December 3, 2018 to Ms. Aakansha Bawa. As per the information gathered from SFIO, it has been pointed out that Aakansha Bawa is not filing her income-tax returns and as per her bank statement, there is no other source of income other than the amount so transferred from R. C. Bawa - The Union of India is alleging that the lockers were operated in wilful defiance of the order of this Bench dated December 3, 2018 and there is direct link between Mrs. Asha Kiran Bawa and IFIN, as the valuables purchased from the proceeds of misfeasance, which were sought to be transferred/alienated from the locker of an ex-director of IFIN, against whom complaint before the Special Judge for committing fraud in IFIN is filed, and is under adjudication. In the case in hand, undisputedly, the amount has been transferred from the account of Ramesh C. Bawa to the applicants account, and it is also on record that when the application was filed to freeze the accounts of R. C. Bawa, on the same date, i. e., on December 3, 2018 the amount worth ₹ 4.84 crores was transferred to the account of the applicant Ms. Aakansha Bawa, who is not even the income tax payee. It is also on record that amount of ₹ 27.67 crores has been transferred from the account of Ramesh C. Bawa to the account of the applicant Mrs. Asha Kiran Bawa, happens to be the wife of R. C. Bawa - It is also on record that the said amount which was received from the account of R. C. Bawa was further transferred to the account of the companies wherein the applicants are/were directors. The plaintiff remains the dominus litis. Order 1, rule 10 of the CPC provides discretionary power to the court. The IL and FS/IFIN case is one of the instances wherein ₹ 91,000 crores have been siphoned off, and SFIO investigation is undergoing. Father of Ms. Akansha Bawa who has been the director of IFIN is in judicial custody, based on the report filed by SFIO, and it is also on record that amount received from R. C. Bawa has been transferred to the accounts of the applicants. Therefore, they are a necessary party to the case. There is no justification for recalling the order passed by this Bench dated April 26, 2019 hence M. A. Nos. 2006 and 2007 of 2019 deserves to be rejected - Application dismissed.
|