9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 573X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Company Application (IB) NO. 31/KB/2018 And Company Petition (IB) NO. 3/KB/2017 - - - Dated:- 14-2-2018 - MR. JINAN K. R., J. For The Applicant : Supratim Laha, Bikash Shaw, Vinod Kumar Kothari, Ms. Rajarshi Dutta and Sourjya Roy, Advs. ORDER 1. This is an Appeal filed by one of the Financial Creditors, namely, UCO Bank under section 42 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I B Code) challenging the order of rejection of its claim by the Liquidator as per an order of rejection by way of an Electronic Mail dated 8-12-2017. 2. This appeal has been filed on 18-12-2017. As per Section 42 of the IB Code, 2016, an application of this nature is to be filed within 14 days of the receipt of the decision under challenge. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ey submitted the proof of claim with the Liquidator as attachments to E-Mail dated 5-12-2017.The Liquidator rejected its claim vide reply E-Mail dated 8-12-2017. Aggrieved by the rejection, the Appellant filed this appeal. 6. The Ld. Liquidator has filed reply contending that he has considered and examined all the claims received by him till the last date as mentioned in the public notice, on 22-11-2017. According to the Liquidator, Section 38(1) of the Code permit the Liquidator to accept claims filed within 30 days of the commencement of the liquidation process and that the Appellant in the instant case, had failed to submit any claim to the Liquidator until the last date i.e. 22-11-2017. 7. The Liquidator further submits that upon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... last date fixed in public announcement, i.e. till the approval of a Resolution Plan. But there is no similar provision in the Code or in the Regulation enabling the Liquidator in receiving a claim fixed in the public announcement. Therefore there is no infirmity or illegality in the order of rejection of the claim of the appellant herein. So the question is whether the adjudicating authority can condone the delay and direct the liquidator to reconsider the claim on its merits? 11. In the case in hand, the Resolution Process is already finalised and the Liquidator has been appointed. Therefore, Regulation 12(2) above referred is not applicable. The Ld. Liquidator, at this juncture, brought to my notice, Section 474 of the Companies Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection 40(1) : The liquidator, may, after verification of claims under section 39, either admit or reject the claim, in whole or in part, as the case may be : Provided that where the liquidator rejects a claim, he shall record in writing the reasons for such rejection. 40. (2). The liquidator shall communicate his decision of admission or rejection of claims to the creditor and corporate debtor with in seven days of such admission or rejection of claims. 14. Thus on going through the various provisions of the code, what I understood is that in the case of delay in submission of a claim by a financial creditor who has participated in the CIRP what is to be done by the liquidator is silent. On the other hand reading secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled in submission of its claim in time. But there is no undue delay though the reason for the delay in submission of the claim is found not at all satisfactory. 19. At this juncture Ld. Liquidator cited a Judgment, T.R. Rajakumari v. Motion Picture Producers [1942] 1 MLJ 182 of Hon'ble Madras High Court for highlighting the power of this Tribunal in granting relief in the case of delay in submission of the claim. Though the above said decision was dealt with referring to the Rule 83 of the Indian Company Rules the proposition in excusing the delay in filing the claim by a creditor at a belated stage can be applied in the case in hand . 20. In view of the above said discussion, it appears to me that the delay in submission of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
