TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 421X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court on 26.03.2020, an Application was filed in the Hon ble Supreme Court seeking clarification to the same effect that the order does not prohibit keeping the account in the fixed deposits which Application was rejected. Since Applications are already fixed on 24.02.2022 for consideration of the interim distribution and appropriation, we see no necessity to direct that the amount to be kept in the fixed deposits in a Nationalised Bank. We recall our order dated 01.12.2021 for keeping the amount in fixed deposits and prayers in I.A No. 2404 of 2021 as on date cannot be granted - Application disposed off. - Comp. App. (AT) No. 346 of 2018 & I.A. No. 185, 2074 & 2075 of 2020 & 59, 785, 786, 888, 889, 1849, 2404 of 2021 Comp. App. (AT) No. 347 of 2018 Comp. App. (AT) No. 256 of 2019 Comp. App. (AT) No. 36 of 2021 Contempt Case (AT) No. 04 of 2022 - - - Dated:- 8-2-2022 - Comp. App. (AT) No. 346 of 2018 I.A. No. 185, 2074 2075 of 2020 59, 785, 786, 888, 889, 1849, 2404 of 2021 Comp. App. (AT) No. 347 of 2018 Comp. App. (AT) No. 256 of 2019 Comp. App. (AT) No. 36 of 2021 Contempt Case (AT) No. 04 of 2022 IN Comp. App. (AT) No. 346 of 2018 [Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairpe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hna Kumar, Ms. Harshita Singh, Mr. Nitin Pal, Advocates for Indian Overseas Bank. Mr, Vikas Kumar, Mr. Manish Paliwal, Intervenor Mr. Pawan Kumar Bansal, Mr. Ahsar UL Haq, Advocates for Applicant in I.A. No. 1820 of 2019. Mr. Sanjay Kapur for SBS. Mr. Sudhanshu Batra, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sarojanand Jha, Mr. Suraj Malik, Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocates for Applicant in I.A 2113/2021 and 2114/2021 Mr. Chetan Mittal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Aabhas Kshetarpal, Mr. Rajesh Goel, Mr. Jatin Kumar, Mr. Udit Garg, Advocates for Applicant in I.A 1982 OF 2021. Mr. Puneet Taneja, Ms. Laxmi Kumari, Mr. Manmohan Singh, Advocates for Gail. Mr. Abhinav Vasisht, Senior Advocate with Mr. Chitranshul A Sinha, Ms. Akshita Sachdeva, Advocates for Chennai Metro. Mr. Shailesh Suman, Advocate for Applicant in I.A No. 785 786. Mr. Syed Arsalan, Mr. Prateek Khaitan, Mr. Chatanya Sharma, Mr. Shitij Chakravarty, Advocates for Jammu Kashmir Bank. Mr. Nakul Dewan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pranaya Goyal, Mr. Chiranjivi Sharma, Advocates for HDFC Bank. Mr. Tushar Mehta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Sanjay Bajaj, Mr. Sagar Diwan, Mr. Rajat Prakash, Mr. Samarth Bajaj, Advocates for Canara Bank. Mr. Sanjay Kapur, Ms. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interim direction was issued that amount received in the Escrow Account of RMSL and RMGSL be invested in fixed deposits on Nationalised Bank. 5. Reply to Application I.A No. 2404 of 2021 has been filed by both Canara Bank and Union Bank of India. Shri Dhruv Mehta, Learned Senior Counsel for the Canara Bank submitted that the Canara Bank was not heard when the interim order was passed on 01.12.2021. In its Reply, it has submitted that after the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court dated 26.03.2021, an I.A praying for clarification of the order dated 26.03.2021 was filed before the Hon ble Supreme Court in which clarification Application being Clarification Application No. 1470-1471 of 2021, following prayers was made before the Hon ble Supreme Court:- (a) Clarification the Judgment dated March 26, 2021 to the extent that it does not prohibit the creation of fixed deposits from the monies received in the Escrow Accounts with the relevant escrow bank (with whom the excrowed amounts are currently deposited), and such creation of fixed deposits would not amount to an appropriation of the monies lying in the respective Escrow Account; and (b) Pass such other order(s) as thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amount which is lying in the Escrow Account should be directed to be kept in the fixed deposits in a Nationalised Bank. As noticed above, after the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court on 26.03.2020, an Application was filed in the Hon ble Supreme Court seeking clarification to the same effect that the order does not prohibit keeping the account in the fixed deposits which Application was rejected. 12. Be that as it may, from the materials on the record, it does appear that it is a debt amount of 80% which has been directed to be deposited by the Respondent. 13. Shri Ramji Srinivasan, Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the Union has already filed an Application for interim distribution of the amounts lying in the different accounts. There are other Applications filed by the other Claimants including Banks for appropriation some of which Applications have already fixed on 24.02.2022. 14. We, thus, are of the view that since Applications are already fixed on 24.02.2022 for consideration of the interim distribution and appropriation, we see no necessity to direct that the amount to be kept in the fixed deposits in a Nationalised Bank. We recall our order dated 01.12.202 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
