Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Axalta Coating Systems India Private ... vs Abhit Kumar Singh Liquidator

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal16 February 2023

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The appeal is dismissed on the ground that the claimant's submissions regarding Section 36(3)(i) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 do not, on the material before the Tribunal, displace the Adjudicating Authority's refusal to direct the liquidator to admit a claim filed 85 days after the last date fixed for submission; the Tribunal treats the late filing as a sufficient basis for the refusal.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALPRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1164 of 2022

IN THE MATTER OF: Axalta Coating Systems India Pvt. Ltd ...Appellant

Versus

Abhit Kumar Singh Liquidator of Mohan Motor Udyog Pvt. Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant : Mr. Vivek Sinha, Mr. Vivek Malik and Mr. Shubham, Advocates

For Respondent : Mr. Ashish Chaudhary and Mr. Anand Kamal, Advocates

ORDER

16.02.2023 Heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant and Respondent

at length.

2. The Appellant preferred this Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.

1164 of 2022 under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order dated 25.07.2022 passed by

National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata in IA

(IBC)/461/(KB)2022 filed in CP (IB)/1617(KB)2019 whereby the said IA

(IBC)/461/(KB)2022 seeking direction the liquidator to admit the claim of the

applicant, admittedly, the claims were submitted 85 days after the last date

that was on 05.12.2021. By which the Adjudicating Authority was rejected

the said IA holding that it is not feasible to direct the consideration of any

claim at this stage.

3. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent/Liquidator has filed the Reply

Affidavit and Rejoinder by the Appellant, which are taken on record.

4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant during the course of argument

referred to the provisions of Section 36(3)(i) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Code, 2016 and submitted that the order impugned passed by the

Adjudicating Authority is bad in law, even if the subject matter property is

disposed of and all proceeds of liquidation as and when they are realised are

to be kept in liquidation estate and when the liquidation has been done is to

be distributed the claim in order.

Based on these Submissions, the impugned order is fit to be set aside

and the instant Appeal may be allowed.

5. The Ld. Counsel for the Respondent during the course of argument

referred to Para 10 of the Reply Affidavit and submitted that the delay of 85

days in filing the claim and further it is submitted that the Corporate Debtor,

Respondent herein has entered into the Supply Agreement dated 24.08.2018

with the Appellant. Further, the Agreement was between the Appellant and

Mohan Motor Udyog Pvt. Ltd. a Partnership firm and the Respondent being

Mohan Motor Udyog Pvt. Ltd., has nothing to do with the Supply Agreement

dated 24.08.2018 and further the claim was filed with a delay of 85 days

despite the notice of liquidation being published on the website of the IBBI

and sufficient time being granted to all the creditors to file their claim. In view

of the fact, the Adjudication Authority has rightly been passed the impugned

order.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1164 of 2022 2 of 3

6. After hearing the parties and gone through the pleadings made on

behalf of the parties, we do not find any merit in the instant Appeal. Therefore,

the instant Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.

[Justice Anant Bijay Singh] Member (Judicial)

[Mr. Kanthi Narahari] Member (Technical) pks/kam

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1164 of 2022 3 of 3

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free