Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Dhananjay Pralhad Salunkhe Patil vs New Phaltan Sugar Works Ltd

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal19 December 2019

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Whether a financial creditor qualifies as a secured creditor, where its claimed security rests on movable property and there is no security interest over immovable property, is a question of fact to be determined by the Resolution Professional and the Committee of Creditors in the corporate insolvency resolution process, and the Adjudicating Authority or the Appellate Tribunal cannot sit over that determination.

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

Judgment

As delivered

NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNALNEW DELHICompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1458 of 2019IN THE MATTER OF:

Dhananjay Pralhad Salunkhe Patil ...Appellant

Versus

New Phaltan Sugar Works Ltd. ...Respondent

Present: For Appellant : Dr. Dinesh Rattan Bhardwaj, Advocate

For Respondent : Mr. Basava P. Patil, Senior Advocate with Mr. Jatin Zaveri and Mr. Neel Kamal Mishra, Advocates

ORDER

19.12.2019 The grievance of the Appellant is that the Appellant has been

treated as 'unsecured financial creditor' by the 'Resolution Professional'. Against

the said decision, the Appellant moved an application before the Adjudicating

Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) Mumbai Bench, Mumbai which

rejected the application by impugned order dated 23rd October, 2019.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant submits that the

impugned order is not a speaking order and the Adjudicating Authority has held

that the detailed order will follow.

However, we find, on the basis of the record, that the 'Resolution

Professional' and the 'Committee of Creditors' noticed that the Appellant's claim

of 'Secured Creditor' rests on movable properties and not on any immoveable

properties as there is no security interest on immovable properties and pledge in

respect of immoveable properties cannot be claimed. The 'Resolution -2-

Professional' and the 'Committee of Creditors' held that the Appellant - 'Financial

Creditor' is not a 'secured creditor'.

Whether the Appellant is a 'secured creditor' or not, is a question of fact

and it can be decided by the 'Resolution Professional' and any decision further

can be taken by the 'Committee of Creditors'. The Adjudicating Authority

(National Company Law Tribunal) or 'National Company Law Appellate Tribunal'

cannot sit over the decision of the 'Resolution Professional' or 'Committee of

Creditors in this regard.

For the reasons aforesaid, we are not inclined to interfere with the

impugned order. The Appeal is dismissed. No costs.

[Justice S.J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[Justice Bansi Lal Bhat] Member (Judicial)

/ns/gc

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1458 of 2019

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