9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1069X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dismissed. The Adjudicating Authority has considered the submissions made by the Appellant and have held that the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of COMMITTEE OF CREDITORS OF ESSAR STEEL INDIA LIMITED THROUGH AUTHORISED SIGNATORY VERSUS SATISH KUMAR GUPTA OTHERS [ 2019 (11) TMI 731 - SUPREME COURT] relied by the Resolution Professional, wherein it is observed that it is the responsibility of the Resolution Professional to collect, collate and finally admit claims of all creditors, the role of the Resolution Professional is not adjudicatory but administrative. Registry to upload the Judgment on the website of this Appellate Tribunal and send the copy of this Judgment to the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad Court 2), forthwith. - Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 307 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 23-9-2022 - [Justice Anant Bijay Singh] Member (Judicial) And [Ms. Shreesha Merla] Member (Technical) For the Appellant: Mr. K. Datta, Sr. Advocate along with Ms. Mehak Khurana, Mr. Ninod Chaurasia and Mr. Aabhas Singh, Advocates For the Respondent : Ms. Honey Satpal, Advocate for R-1. Ms. Veneet Trehan, Advocate for Inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iated as per the mandatory arbitration Clause 32 of the loan Agreements, the relevant clause is hereunder: 32. ARBITRATION 32. 1 Any conflict, difference, controversies, or disputes arising between the parties shall be resolved amicably at the first instance. Unresolved disputes, if any, shall be submitted/referred to the arbitration of the Sole Arbitrator. The Sole Arbitrator shall be either the Director or Head-Commercial Business of INTEC Capital Limited or any other person nominated by him/them. The Arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Rules thereunder any amendments thereto and the language of the Arbitration shall be English. The decision/award of the Arbitrator shall be final/conclusive and binding on the parties. The seat of Arbitration shall be Delhi. iv) The Appellant also issued a Section 13(2) notice under SARFAESI Act, 2002 on 15.02.2019 seeking recovery of Rs. 3,50,46,561/- v) Further case is that the Ld. Arbitrator passed an award dated 04.04.2016 (Annexure 10 at page 304 to 336, Vol.- II of the Appeal) in favour of the Appellant in all three cases. The Corporate Debtor receive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssional was appointed. In the light of the above, the Appellant withdrew its petition under Section 9 of the IBC vide order dated 26.11.2019. Further, the Appellant filed its claim on 15.10.2019 as total of Rs. 4,51,96,588.08/- with the Respondent- Resolution Professional. The said claim was admitted provisionally by the Respondent. There was no issue raised by the erstwhile board of management also on the claim of the Appellant. However, on 12.12.2019 in the 2nd CoC meeting, the claim of the Appellant was reduced from Rs. 4,51,96,588.08/- to Rs. 94 lacs without any basis. viii) The Appellant was shocked by such reduction and therefore a series of e-mail communications ensued between the Appellant and the Resolution Professional, in order to explain to him the calculation done by Appellant in respect of claim. However, without appreciating the explanation provided by the Appellant to substantiate its claim, the Resolution Professional again made a drastic reduction in the claim of the Appellant to the tune of Rs. 69 lacs only. Vide its email dated 03.02.2020, the RP provided completely erroneous calculation, based on selective reading of the arbitral award, sanction letter and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ards is Rs. 5,84,43,439/- but Resolution Professional while calculating as per awards is himself giving benefit of collateral security to the Corporate Debtor as evident from calculation given by Resolution Professional. The Sanction Letter (Clause 11) it is clearly mentioned that no interest will be payable on collateral in case of premature termination yet Resolution Professional has given benefit to Corporate Debtor without considering the fact that Ld. Arbitrator completely ignored the same. The Sanction Letter and Loan Agreement clearly states the penal interest to be 3% per month which amounts to 36% per annum yet the Resolution Professional calculated the claim by taking 18% per annum while admitting the claim irrespective the method of calculation. 7. It is further submitted that Resolution Professional be directed to admit claim as per mutually agreed terms of sanction or as per Arbitral Awards which comes out to be Rs. 5,84,43,439/-. Based on these submissions the impugned order is set aside and the Appeal be allowed. 8. The Ld. Counsel for the Respondent during the course of argument and in his reply affidavit along with written submissions submitted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en sent on 03.02.2020 (Annexure E of the reply) in which it is informed that the claim of Rs. 4,51,96,588.08/- is received against Perfect Boring Pvt. Ltd., admitting the appellant claim of Rs. 69,38,050.38/- as per calculation. 11. We observe that in the 4th CoC meeting held on 17.02.2020, the Respondent informed the CoC about revised claim of the Appellant i.e. Rs. 69,38,050/-. However, objection has been raised by the Appellant on the reduction of the claim and asked to consider some points at page no. 11 and 12 of the reply for accepting the claim and further in response to it the Respondent informed that the arbitration award considered at 18% interest instead of 36% and further the interest amount of security deposit was never credited in Corporate Debtor bank account and also the TDS Certificate (26 AS) of Perfect Boring Pvt. Ltd. for the Financial year 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 are evident. The interest on security deposit has been deducted by Intec Capital Ltd. but interest was not credited to Perfect Boring Pvt. Ltd. , therefore, the claim of the Appellant has been verified and admitted based on the information and documents available. The claim was verified based o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
