SYNOPSIS - Affidavit in Reply is filed by Respondent No. 1, Hirak Nath Sounth

 

BEFORE THE HON’BLE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA BENCH

IA No. (IBC) 1339/KB/2025
in
CP (IB) No. 2137/KB/2019

IN THE MATTER OF:
Samskar Financial Services Private Limited … Financial Creditor

Versus

Roofers Infrastructure India Private Limited … Corporate Debtor

AND IN THE MATTER OF:
Tapan Chakraborty … Resolution Professional / Applicant

Versus

1. Hirak Nath Sounth … Respondent No. 1
2. Jayanti Sounth … Respondent No. 2

SYNOPSIS

The present Affidavit in Reply is filed by Respondent No. 1, Smt. Hirak Nath Sounth, suspended Director of Roofers Infrastructure India Pvt. Ltd., in opposition to the application filed by the Resolution Professional under Section 66 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The application is misconceived, not maintainable, and devoid of any cause of action against the answering respondent.

The Corporate Debtor has remained non-operational since the financial year 2011–12, having no business activity, assets, or office premises. The respondent neither possesses nor controls any books of account, records, or properties of the company. The allegation of fraudulent or wrongful trading is wholly unfounded and unsustainable in law.

The affairs of the Corporate Debtor have been under judicial and investigative supervision for several years. A One-Man Committee headed by Hon’ble Justice S.P. Talukdar (Retd.) was constituted by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court by order dated 14.09.2017 in W.P. No. 24057(W) of 2015. Further, a winding-up proceeding (CP/306(KB)/2021) filed by the Registrar of Companies is pending before this Hon’ble Tribunal, and the company is also under investigation by the CBI in FIR No. RC-9/E/17-EOIV-Kol., dated 25.05.2017.

In the above circumstances, there exists no element of intent to defraud creditors or any wrongful conduct on the part of the respondent. The entire management and records of the Corporate Debtor are already under judicial custody, and the respondent has extended full cooperation within her limited means. Hence, the present application is liable to be dismissed as baseless and not maintainable.