Sahib Ram Sehrawat and others v. State of Haryana and others
Case Details
CWP No. 1951 of 2025 (O&M) -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh CWP No. 1951 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 30.4.2025 Sahib Ram Sehrawat and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS SURI Present: Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners.
Legal Reasoning
Therefore, we are of the view that only because there is a moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC against the company, it cannot be said that no proceedings can be initiated against the opposite party Nos. 2 to 9 (the respondent Nos. 2 to 9) for execution, provided that they are otherwise liable to abide by and comply with the order, which is passed against the company. The protection of the moratorium will not be available to the directors/officers of the company.” 8. Since it appears that the verdict (supra) has not been abided by the concerned, probably because the said was not placed before the Executing Court/Executing authority, thus therebys the impugned order became passed. It is in the wake of the above lack of placings, of the verdict (supra) rendered by the Apex Court, before the Executing Court concerned, that the impugned order did make derogation therefroms. 9. Resultantly, after quashing the impugned order, this Court directs the Executing Court concerned, to revive the Execution Petition (Annexure P-4A), and, to in terms of the supra extracted expostulations of law, carried in the supra verdict rendered by the Apex Court, decide the same. 10. The said would also necessarily requires the impleadment of the functional promoters of the JD/company. As such, an application for causing impleadment of the supra, if not already filed, be forthwith filed, and, on the said application, a prompt order in terms of the supra expositions of law, be rendered by the learned Executing Court/Executing Authority concerned. 11. Subsequently, the decision on the Execution Petition be rendered within four months from today, but after hearing all the affected Gurpreet Singh 2025.04.30 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh persons concerned. CWP No. 1951 of 2025 (O&M) -5- 12.
Arguments
Mr. Ankur Mittal, Addl. A.G., Haryana, Mr. Pardeep Prakash Chahar, Sr. DAG, Haryana. Mr. Saurabh Mago, DAG, Haryana and Mr. Karan Jindal, AAG, Haryana for the respondent-State. Mr. Ankur Mittal, Advocate with Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate and Ms. Sharvi Dadhwal, Advocate for respondent No. 2. Mr. Devvrat Rana, Resolution Professional, (for Corporate Debtor) in person. **** SURESHWAR THAKUR , J. (ORAL) 1. Through the instant writ petition, a challenge is cast to the order dated 11.10.2024 (Annexure P-32). The said order became passed by respondent No. 2, on an application dated 7.10.2024 (Annexure P-29) wherebys, the relief claimed thereins for revival of the execution petition, became declined. 2. Necessarily, the filing of the execution petition was uncontrovertedly pursuant to a binding and conclusive verdict becoming Gurpreet Singh 2025.04.30 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No. 1951 of 2025 (O&M) -2- rendered on 7.9.2018, verdict whereof becomes embodied in Annexure P-1. 3. Though the said binding and conclusive decision was required to be enforced through an execution petition being filed before the learned Executing Court/Executing Authority concerned, and, an effective order being rendered thereons. However, it appears, that in the face of a moratorium becoming imposed on 5.3.2024 (Annexure P-22), by the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, that therebys the Executing Court/Executing Authority, thus relented from executing the binding and conclusive verdict (supra). Furthermore, the said passed order was appealed by the aggrieved therefrom, before the appellate authority concerned, which led to the passing of the order dated 26.7.2024 (Annexure P-23). 4. Today, the Resolution Professional is present in Court, and, states that the import of the supra passed order, is that, the moratorium as became imposed against the judgment debtor company, is still in operation, wherebys there is unamenability for realization of the decretal amount from the judgment debtor company. 5. It appears that as stated supra, the passing of the supra order had restrained the learned Executing Court/Executing Authority concerned, from executing the binding and conclusive verdict (supra). 6. The order (Annexure P-32), which is impugned before this Court, becomes extracted hereinafter. “x x x Although vide order of this forum dated 24.7.2024, file was x ordered to be consigned to the record room, with direction not to weed out the same till further orders. It was pointed out on that day i.e. 24.7.2024, that insolvency proceedings were going on against JD and this fact was admitted by learned counsel for DH also. It is worth mentioning that recovery certificate was issued Gurpreet Singh 2025.04.30 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No. 1951 of 2025 (O&M) -3- in this matter to the Collector, Gurugram on 21.2.2023, to recover decretal amount from JD as arrears of land revenue. In view of order/circular issued by Chief Secretary Government of Haryana, No. 50/15/20240-5S (1) dated 11th May 2024, powers of the Collector have been conferred upon the Adjudicating Officer and all the recovery certificates have been received back. As per learned counsel for DH, no amount has been recovered through Collector, Gurugram till now. Notice was issued to both of parties and hence file was put up today again. As mentioned above, insolvency proceedings are going on against the JD. Moratorium is in force. In such a circumstance, this forum cannot proceed with the matter. File be sent back to the record room, with direction not to weed out the same, till further orders” 7. Though, the remedy to challenge the said order, is through an appeal thereagainst being filed, before the learned statutory appellate authority concerned. However, since the order challenged before this Court is in derogation of the principles stated in a judgment rendered by the Apex Court in case titled as Ansal Crown Heights Flat Buyers Association (Regd.) versus M/s Ansal Crown Infrabuild Pvt. Ltd. and others, and to which Civil Appeal No(s). 4480-4481 of 2023, becomes assigned, whereins, in paragraphs 10 and 11, paragraphs whereof become extracted hereinafter, it has been forthrightly stated, that irrespective of a moratorium becoming imposed upon the judgment debtor company, wherebys it becomes deterred to cause the realization of the decretal amounts/debts, vis-a-vis the secured creditors/decree holders, yet there is a permissibility for proceeding against the promoters of the company. “10. Thus, this Court approved the view taken in the case of P. Mohanraj(supra) that notwithstanding moratorium, the liability, if any, of the directors/officers will continue. This Court, therefore, permitted the appellants to expressly proceed against Gurpreet Singh 2025.04.30 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CWP No. 1951 of 2025 (O&M) -4- the promoters of the company though there was a moratorium under Section 14 of the IBC affecting the company. 11.
Decision
The miscellaneous application(s), if any, is/are also disposed of. (SURESHWAR THAKUR) JUDGE (VIKAS SURI) JUDGE April 30, 2025 Gurpreet Whether speaking/reasoned : : Whether reportable Yes/No Yes/No Gurpreet Singh 2025.04.30 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh