9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 731 - SUPREME COURT ] as relied by the RP, wherein it is observed that it is the responsibility of the RP to collect, collate and finally admit claims of all creditors. The role of the RP is not adjudicatory but administrative. Hence, the allegation so made by the applicant in the application is baseless and without any substance. The application so filed by the applicant is not maintainable, as the RP has already collated the genuine claim of the applicant based on the document, so filed by the applicant - Application dismissed. - IA 246 of 2020 in CP(IB) 441/NCLT/AHM/2019 - - - Dated:- 10-3-2021 - MANORAMA KUMARI, MEMBER JUDICIAL AND CHOCKALINGAM THIRUNAVUKKARASU, MEMBER TECHNICAL For the Appellant : Urvesh Gor and Sagar Bansal, Advocates For the Respondent : Vishal Dava and Nipun Singhvi, Advocates ORDER MANORAMA KUMARI, MEMBER (J) 1. The instant application is filed by the applicant Under Section 60(5)(c) of the IB Code with the following prayer: a. To direct the Resolution Professional to restore the claim of the applicant as it was lodged in accordance with the arbitration award. b. To direct the RP to provide details, documents and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owever, during the CIRP the RP has scrutinising the claim and on 12.12.2019 after 2 months in the 2nd CoC meeting drastically reduced the claim of the applicant to Rs. 94 lacs/- only against the claim of Rs. 4,51,96,588.08/-. In view of that the voting right of the Applicant was reduced to 4.8%. The applicant approached the Respondent and tried to make RP understand that he had erred in collaborating the calculation. It is further alleged that the RP has adopted Pick and Choose method. 6. It is further submitted that since the Arbitration Award is under challenge before the Arbitration Court. Hence the applicant did not filed the claim as per the Award as it is Sub-Judice before the Court of Law. 7. The learned lawyer further submitted that, only alternative available with the applicant was to calculate the dues of the Corporate Debtor Company as per his books of account in consonance with sanction letter and its terms, which was calculated and lodged. Since the application of Corporate Debtor company was dismissed for want of prosecution after provisional admission of the claim lodged by the Applicant, hence, RP cannot change or dispute the mode of calculation of the claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... B) 1,01,25,000.00 84,37,500.00 84,37,500.00 Net Outstanding (A-B) 34,50,170.69 6,04,988.06 11,83,509.06 Interest @ 18% (from 25.04.2015-31.03.2016-340 days) 5,78,494.37 Interest @ 18% (from 28.05.2015-31.03.2016-307 days) 91,593.53 Interest @ 18% (from19.05.2015-31.03..2016-316 days) 1,84,432.86 Interest @ 18% (from-01.04.2016-31.03.2017) 6,21,030.72 108,897.85 2,13,0312.63 Interest @ 18% (from 01.04.2017-31.03.2018 6,21,030.72 1,08,897.85 2,13,0312.63 Interest @ 18% (from 01.04.2018-31.03.2019 6,21,030.72 1,08,897.85 2,13,0312.63 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ajay Kumar Sahoo from Reserve Bank of India (RBI) stated that: Several attempts to contact you on mobile No. 7940084117 failed as it was busy. It has been observed from the documents submitted by the NBFC that the interest on Rs. 2,70,00,000/- at the rate of 7% per annum is reportedly credited to the loan account till the date when the asset became non-performing. Thus your complaint is resolve on our intervention and will be closed at the day end of December 20, 2019. You are advised to furnish your comment within the stipulated timeframe to avoid closure of complaint at your end. (Copy of the mail dated 03.01.2020 is attached and marked as Annexure-C respectively). 14. After receiving RBI complaint resolution copy, RP sent a mail to the applicant on 04.01.2020 informing inter alia that RP observed from the documents submitted by the applicant that the interest on Rs. 2,70,00,000/- @ 7% per annum is reportedly credited to the loan account till date when the asset became Non-performing. However, RP was not able to see the interest credited in corporate debtor's account. Hence the RP asked the applicant with regard to such credit of interest amount in the account. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,321.00 9,37,311.00 Net Claim 59,35,264.70 2,26,028.63 12,28,814.31 69,38,050.38 16. Accordingly, the RP has also informed the CoC about the revised admitted claim of Intec Capital Limited i.e. Rs. 69,38,050/-. However, Mr. Subhash Chander representative of the applicant raised objection on such reduction of the claim. 17. Heard both sides and gone through the records, it is found that RP received the claim from the applicant and verified the same according to the information available, thereafter, on receipt of additional information from Mr. Vasant Modi (Suspended Board of management) regarding the arbitration award. Hence the claim was provisionally admitted taking into consideration the arbitration award. However, on receipt of a mail from suspended board of management and RBI, as stated herein above, the claim of the applicant is refused by the RP. The said facts are duly been updated to the applicant about the status of his claim. 18. Based on the documents and the information so provided by the applicant, the RP has to collate and place the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
