9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 418X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the claim. Hon ble NCLAT in the matter of SUMAT KUMAR GUPTA, RESOLUTION PROFESSIONAL, M/S VALLABH TEXTILES COMPANY LIMITED VERSUS M/S VARDHMAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED [ 2022 (7) TMI 1252 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , PRINCIPAL BENCH , NEW DELHI ], wherein the Hon ble NCLAT, inter alia, considered the issue of whether serious efforts were made by the Appellant/Resolution Professional in properly verifying the claim submitted before him by the Financial Creditor including classifying the debts into financial and operational debts. In the present case the claim was received by the respondent-Resolution Professional before the approval of the resolution plan by the CoC in its 5th meeting held on 28.02.2022. Keeping in view of the above observations of the Hon ble NCLAT, we hold that in the present case, an opportunity should have been given to the applicant by the respondent-Resolution Professional to rectify the mistakes in the claim form. The claim should not have been rejected summarily without presenting the complete facts to the CoC - Application allowed. Direction to respondent-Resolution Professional to collate the claim of the applicant and to put the appli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion, the applicant prays to allow the present application, and the respondent may be directed to allow/accept the claim as filed by the applicant. 3. The applicant has stated that it had submitted its claim through e-mail dated 07.02.2022 as well as through post on 08.02.2022 which was duly delivered on 11.02.2022. Copy of the e-mail and postal receipt along with the tracking report is annexed as Annexures A-3 and A-4 of the application. Subsequently, the claim under Form B was served to the respondent with relevant documents and a supporting affidavit followed by an e-mail to the respondent on 15.02.2022 to apprise them about the claims submitted on behalf of the applicant. But no reply was received. Subsequently, the applicant has been informed that the claim was rejected because the same was not filed within the stipulated time. It is also submitted that though the claim was filed before the approval of the resolution plan by the CoC, the delay in filing the same was due to the Covid-19 pandemic situation existing in the country a fact which even the Hon ble Apex Court has taken suo moto cognizance and has directed to exclude the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s approved by the CoC on 28.02.2022. The operational creditor is a regular business associate of the corporate debtor having the principal amount of claim reflected in the Books of Account of the CD.Despite this back ground, it is apparent that the claims were not put up by the respondent-Resolution Professional with his observations before the CoC before the same was rejected. The issue of attachment of the wrong documents could have been addressed by the respondent-Resolution Professional by simply requisitioning the right documents and does not in itself give an excuse for not considering the claim. In this connection, a reference has been made to the decision of the Hon ble NCLAT in the matter of Sumat Kumar Gupta, RP, M/s Vallabh Textiles Company Ltd. Vs. M/s Vardhman Industries Ltd. In Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No. 762 of 2022 dated 27.07.2022, wherein the Hon ble NCLAT, inter alia, considered the issue of whether serious efforts were made by the Appellant/Resolution Professional in properly verifying the claim submitted before him by the Financial Creditor including classifying the debts into financial and operational debts. and has observed as under:- 20. Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... admissibility of the claim. The respondent-Resolution Professional is further directed to complete this process within three weeks from the date of this order and inform the applicant about the fate of its claim immediately after that. The respondent-Resolution Professional is also directed to submit on affidavit the decision on the admissibility of the applicant s claim before this Bench within one week of the said decision for further consideration at the time of approval of the connected resolution plan filed by IA No.340/2022 before this Bench. With these observations, the present IA No.157/2022 stands allowed and disposed of accordingly. IA No.435/2022 The present application has been filed under Section 60(5) read with Regulation 18(1)(a) of the IBC, 2016. In the present application, M/s Ashoka Drugs Chemicals is the applicant, and Rchem Industries Private Limited through Resolution Professional, Harish Malhotra is the respondent. 2. In the present application, the applicant prays to direct the respondent-Resolution Professional to collate the claim of the applicant and to put the applicant s name in the list maintained for this purpose; and to direct the res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wherein it is admitted by the respondent-Resolution Professional that the applicant s principal amount of Rs.2,00,84,671/- as on 19.06.2019 was reflected in the books of account of the corporate debtor and the claim of interest was not reflected in the said Books. It is also repeated that the claim was not filed by the applicant in the proper format. 7. We have heard the learned counsels for both parties and have gone through the records carefully. 8. In the present case, the claims were filed on 17.02.2022, and subsequently, the Resolution Plan was approved by the CoC on 28.02.2022. The operational creditor is a regular business associate of the corporate debtor having the principal amount of claim reflected in the Books of Account of the Corporate Debtor. Despite this background, it is apparent that the claims were not put up by the respondent-Resolution Professional with his observations before the CoC before the same was rejected. The issue of attachment of the wrong documents could have been addressed by the respondent-Resolution Professional by simply requisitioning the right documents and does not in itself give an excuse for not considering the claim. In this connect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. Keeping in view of the above observations of the Hon ble NCLAT, we hold that in the present case, an opportunity should have been given to the applicant by the respondent-Resolution Professional to rectify the mistakes in the claim form. The claim should not have been rejected summarily without presenting the complete facts to the CoC. In view of this, the respondent-Resolution Professional is directed to consider the claim of the applicant including its claim for voting rights on merits afresh and present the complete facts with his observations thereto before the CoC, for taking a final decision on the admissibility of the claim. The respondent-Resolution Professional is further directed to complete this process within three weeks from the date of this order and inform the applicant about the fate of its claim immediately after that. The respondent-Resolution Professional is also directed to submit on affidavit the decision on the admissibility of the applicant s claim before this Bench within one week of the said decision for further consideration at the time of approval of the connected resolution plan filed by IA No.340/2022 before this Bench. With these observations, the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
