Mortgagee Bank cannot Seek Exclusion of Property from Resolution Plan Approved by Unit Holders Having Conveyance Deeds: NCLAT Dismisses Appeal of HDFC [Read Order]
It opined that the Adjudicating Authority rightly held that the Appellant bank has no locus to object to the approved resolution plan
![Mortgagee Bank cannot Seek Exclusion of Property from Resolution Plan Approved by Unit Holders Having Conveyance Deeds: NCLAT Dismisses Appeal of HDFC [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/HDFC-Bank.webp "Mortgagee Bank cannot Seek Exclusion of Property from Resolution Plan Approved by Unit Holders Having Conveyance Deeds: NCLAT Dismisses Appeal of HDFC [Read Order]")
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench, while dismissing the appeal of HDFC Bank, has held that the bank in whose favor mortgage rights were created over the property of the Corporate Debtor cannot seek exclusion of the property from the Resolution Plan, especially when the unit holders, possessing either a conveyance deed or builder-buyer's agreements, have...
The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) New Delhi bench, while dismissing the appeal of HDFC Bank, has held that the bank in whose favor mortgage rights were created over the property of the Corporate Debtor cannot seek exclusion of the property from the Resolution Plan, especially when the unit holders, possessing either a conveyance deed or builder-buyer's agreements, have approved the Resolution Plan.
This Appeal has been filed against the order dated 07.03.2025, by which the Adjudicating Authority considered and rejected the objection filed in I.A. No. 3778 of 2022 by HDFC Bank. The Appellant's case is that it holds a mortgage over units with super area of 8702 sq. ft. on the sixth floor of Universal Business Park, for which a conveyance deed was executed in favour of M/s Nayanika Holdings Pvt. Ltd. on 14.10.2015.
Law Simplified with Tables, Charts & Illustrations – Easy to Understand - Click here
The appellant argued that because the appellant had a mortgage on the units in question, the properties could not be included in the resolution plan. The appellant's sole request was that the units be left out of the resolution plan.
The Tribunal noted that the Appellant claims mortgage rights over the units sold to M/s Nayanika Holdings Pvt Ltd on 14.10.2015. However, the executed conveyance deed shows no Tripartite Agreement between the Corporate Debtor, M/s Nayanika Holdings Pvt Ltd, and the bank. The basis of the Appellant's claim is the loan agreement executed by M/s Nayanika Holdings Pvt Ltd in favour of HDFC Bank.
Read More: GST Assessment Order Against Deceased Person Unsustainable: Madras HC
The bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan (Judicial Member), Mr. Arun Baroka (Technical Member) and Mr. Barun Mitra (Technical Member) observed that the Appellant, not being the unit holder and having no rights in the units except for mortgage rights, cannot seek exclusion of the unit. The units were already considered in the resolution plan, which was approved by unit holders possessing either conveyance deeds or builder-buyer agreements.
Based on the above, it opined that the Adjudicating Authority rightly held that the Appellant bank has no locus to object to the approved resolution plan. As per the earlier order dated 11.06.2021, no objections could be raised except regarding claims of Financial Creditors.
The Tribunal ruled, in rejecting the appeal, that the appellant's proper remedy is against M/s Nayanika Holdings Pvt Ltd, with whom the loan arrangement was signed by depositing title deeds. As a result, the appellant is unable to contest the resolution plan or the unit's participation in it.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
