9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (3) TMI 1109 - AT - Insolvency and BankruptcyCIRP - Seeking a direction to admit the claim of the Appellant as Financial Creditor - HELD THAT - The Application filed by the Corporate Debtor to stay the proceedings of suit in view of the moratorium imposed with effect from 07.04.2021, was allowed and proceedings in suit was stayed. However, the Appellant s suit against the Agent, through whom the Units were booked was allowed to proceed. The possession letter dated 24.09.2014, which has been extracted above, clearly indicate that possession letter was accepted by the Appellant, though under protest. The possession of Unit was thus, handed over to the Appellant on 24.09.2014, thus, the RP did not commit any error in not accepting the claim of the Appellant, for the possession of the Units, which have already been handed over - there are no error in the impugned order passed by the Adjudicating Authority in rejecting IA No.1531 of 2023 filed by the Appellant seeking direction to accept the claim. However, as undertaken by the SRA, the Resolution Plan having been approved on 20.11.2023, the SRA now has undertaken to execute of the Conveyance Deed for both the Units. The order impugned dated 16.06.2023, rejecting IA No.1531 of 2023 is upheld - SRA namely Singla Builders and Promoters Limited shall execute the Conveyance Deed in favour of the Appellant for Units CB-5 and CB-6. Appeal disposed off.
Issues involved: Challenge to order of National Company Law Tribunal, rejection of claim by Adjudicating Authority, possession of commercial spaces, admission of claim by Resolution Professional, approval of Resolution Plan.
Summary: 1. Challenge to Adjudicating Authority's Order: The appeal was filed challenging the order of the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, rejecting the application seeking direction to admit the claim. The Appellant had sought admission of the claim which was rejected by the Adjudicating Authority. 2. Possession of Commercial Spaces: The Corporate Debtor allotted two units to the Appellant in a commercial-cum-office complex. The Appellant made payments and sought possession. Possession letters were signed by the Appellant under protest. The Appellant also filed a Civil Suit seeking refund. 3. Admission of Claim by Resolution Professional: Insolvency proceedings commenced against the Corporate Debtor, and the Resolution Professional (RP) was appointed. The Appellant submitted claims, which were not admitted by the RP. The Appellant challenged this decision through IA No.1531 of 2023. 4. Resolution Plan Approval: The Resolution Plan of the Corporate Debtor was approved by the Adjudicating Authority. The SRA undertook to execute the Conveyance Deed for the units in favor of the Appellant. 5. Judgment Analysis: The Appellant contended that the RP erred in not admitting the claim as a Financial Creditor. The RP and SRA argued that possession had been handed over to the Appellant, and hence the claim was rightly not admitted. The possession letter signed by the Appellant indicated acceptance of possession. 6. Decision and Disposition: The Tribunal upheld the order rejecting the application. However, the SRA was directed to execute the Conveyance Deed for the units. The parties were to bear their own costs. This judgment clarifies the issues surrounding the claim admission, possession of commercial spaces, and the Resolution Plan approval, providing a detailed analysis of the contentions raised by the parties and the ultimate decision rendered by the Tribunal.
|
