9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (11) TMI 1159 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyRejection of Resolution Plan - Appellant submits that the Appellant has paid the full consideration of the 41 flats, therefore, he became the owner of the flats - HELD THAT - At the stage when the application was filed by the Appellant no order could have been passed in his favour as prayed for under the Application - there are no ground to entertain this Appeal. Appeal dismissed.
Issues involved: Appeal under Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against rejection of claim by Resolution Professional.
Analysis: The judgment pertains to an appeal filed under section 61 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against a decision by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) dated 21.09.2021 in Insolvency Petition CP (IB) 923 (PB) 2018. The Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP) had invited claims until 03.09.2019, and the Committee of Creditors (CoC) approved the Resolution Plan on 04.03.2020. The Appellant, however, submitted its claim to the Resolution Professional on 16.06.2020, which was subsequently rejected. The appeal was filed on 19.04.2021 challenging this rejection. The Adjudicating Authority dismissed the application on 21.09.2021, deeming it infructuous. The Counsel for the Appellant argued that the Appellant had paid the full consideration for 41 flats, thus claiming ownership. However, upon hearing both parties, the Tribunal, comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan, Justice Jarat Kumar Jain, and Dr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, opined that the relief sought by the Appellant could not have been granted at the time of filing the application. Consequently, the Tribunal found no merit in entertaining the appeal and dismissed it in limine. In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the decision of the Adjudicating Authority, emphasizing that the relief sought by the Appellant was not viable at the time of application. The dismissal of the appeal signifies that the Appellant's claim for ownership of the flats, despite paying the full consideration, was not tenable within the insolvency proceedings framework.
|
