Canara Bank vs Alphabet Heights Pvt. Ltd. & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 317 of 2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's reasoning rests on the following principles: Where a resolution plan has been approved under the insolvency framework, the Successful Resolution Applicant is bound to make payments strictly in accordance with the approved plan, and the Adjudicating Authority may direct it to do so. An extension of time for payment under an approved resolution plan may be granted where the resolution applicant accepts liability to pay interest on the delayed instalments at the MCLR rate, and the creditor has not shown that the delay warrants refusal. A direction to the resolution applicant to refrain from or withdraw communications regarding action against third-party guarantors or collateral securities is not warranted where such matters are governed by the terms and conditions of the approved resolution plan itself.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 317 of 2022 & I.A. No. 3355 of 2022 IN THE MATTER OF: Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank) ....Appellant Vs. Alphabet Height Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ....Respondents Present: For Appellant: Mr. Hitesh Sachar, Ms. Anju Jain, Ms. Raveena Kataria, Advocates For Respondents: Mr. Mrinal Harshwardhan, Mr. S.Mukherjee, Advocates for R-2. Mr. Pawan Singh, Advocate for R-3
ORDER
28.11.2022: This appeal has been filed against the order dated
21.02.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority by which the I.A. No.
4675/2021 filed by the Canara Bank has been disposed of. Challenging the
said order, this appeal has been filed by the Bank, the Applicant Canara
Bank has made the following prayers:-
(a) Issue directions to the Non-Applicants to
make payment of the remaining instalments, under
the plan, in a time bound manner as per order dated
20.02.2020 passed by the Hon'ble Adjudicating
Authority;
(b) Issue directions to the Non-Applicants to pay
interest on the delayed payments;
(c) Issue directions to the Non-Applicants to
withdraw their communications whereby they are
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 317 of 2022 & I.A. No. 3355 of 2022 1 refraining the Applicant to take action against the
third party guarantors/collateral securities with
respect to outstanding dues of M/s Maple Realcon
Pvt. Ltd. as the action taken by the Applicant is
independent of the plan which stood approved; and
(d) Pass such other/directions as this Hon'ble
Adjudicating Authority may deems fits and proper in
the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. On the aforesaid application, the Adjudicating Authority has disposed
of the matter with the observation that the Resolution Applicant shall act
strictly as per the Resolution Plan approved by the Authority.
3. Learned Counsel for Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA) submits
that as per the plan, the payment was to be made by 25.12.2022. I.A. No.
3355 of 2022 has also been filed by the Respondent in this appeal. In the
application, the Applicant has prayed and sought for six months' extension
from 25.12.2022 which was the date, by which under the Plan, the SRA was
required to pay the entire amount.
4. Learned Counsel for the Appellant has submitted that there has been
some delay in the payments, however, the Respondents have accepted their
liability to make payment of interest at MCLR rate. It is further submitted
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 317 of 2022 & I.A. No. 3355 of 2022 2 that there were some delay, and after the delay, payments are regularly being
made. The application which was filed by the Canara Bank and has been
disposed of basically contained three prayers. First by prayer (a) direction was
sought to make payment in time bound manner and (b) further to pay interest
on the delayed payment. Third direction (c) was to the non-applicants to
withdraw their communications whereby they are refraining to take action
against the third party guarantors/collateral securities with respect to
outstanding dues.
5. The Resolution Plan having been approved the payments are to be made
by the Successful Resolution Applicant as per Plan. The instalments as per
Plan are being paid by the SRA although with some delay. The SRA being
ready to pay the interest on the delayed payment @ MCLR rate, the extension
of six months' time deserves to be allowed. Coming to prayer c made in the
application no direction need be issued since the said prayer seeks action
against third party guarantors/collateral securities which is to governed by
the terms and conditions of the Resolution Plan.
6. We, thus, are of the view that no interference is called for in the order
of the Adjudicating Authority dated 21.02.2022 except allowing the extension
of six months' time for payment of entire amount as prayed by IA No.
3355/2022.
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 317 of 2022 & I.A. No. 3355 of 2022 3
7. We are of the view that the Respondents are obliged to make the
payment of interest on the delayed payment as per their IA No. 3355 of 2022,
they undertake to make the entire payment by 23.06.2023.
The appeal is disposed of as above.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Mr. Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
ss/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 317 of 2022 & I.A. No. 3355 of 2022 4
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