Icici Bank Ltd vs Gopalsamy Ganesh Babu

M/s ICICI Bank Ltd. .... Appellant

Vs

Mr. Gopalsamy Ganesh Babu, Insolvency Professional M/s. Subburaj Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. .... Respondent

Present: For Appellant: Ms. Madhusmita Bora, Advocate.

For Respondents:

ORDER

05.07.2019 Having heard learned Counsel for the Appellant and being

satisfied with the grounds, the delay of 14 days in preferring the Appeal is

condoned. Interlocutory Application No.1966 of 2019 stands disposed of.

2. In the 'Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process' against M/s.

Subburaj Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. the 'Interim Resolution Professional' called

for claims, which were collated and thereafter Information Memorandum was

prepared. On the basis of such Information Memorandum, Expression of

Interests were filed by 'Resolution Applicants' followed by 'Resolution Plans'.

In May 2018, the Appellant was informed that it may file its claim, but the

Appellant sat tight on the matter and did not file its claim either as 'Financial

Creditor' or 'Operational Creditor' pursuant to such information given by the

'Resolution Professional'.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 655 of 2019 Page 1 of 3

3. On the basis of the total claim collated, the 'Resolution Applicants'

submitted their proposal and the best of the 'Resolution Plan' was approved

by the 'Committee of Creditors' on 17th December, 2018. It is only after

approval of the 'Resolution Plan' by the 'Committee of Creditors', the

Appellant filed its claim before the 'Resolution Professional' on 21st

December, 2018.

4. For the said reason, the 'Resolution Professional' having no

jurisdiction, could not include the claim of the Appellant. The 'Resolution

Plan' approved by the Authority on 12th March, 2019, the Appellant

thereafter moved before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law

Tribunal) Single Bench, Chennai, which having noticed the aforesaid fact by

impugned order dated 9th April, 2019 rejected the claim. The Adjudicating

Authority noticed that the Appellant has already moved before the

Subordinate Court with respect to the same very claim in O.S. No.308 of

2008 and the matter remained pending because of Moratorium. It was in this

background also no relief was granted.

5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the 'Resolution Plan'

is already under challenge and pending consideration before this Appellate

Tribunal in another Appeal. However, that cannot be a ground to admit the

claim of the Appellant after approval of the 'Resolution Plan' by the

'Committee of Creditors' or thereafter. The period of Moratorium having

completed, the Appellant may pursue the suit O.S. No.308 of 2008 pending

before the Subordinate Court in the light of Section 60(6) of the I&B Code.

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 655 of 2019 Page 2 of 3

6. We may mention that the Adjudicating Authority has not rejected the

claim, nor we have rejected the claim made by the Appellant, which may be

determined by the Court of competent jurisdiction uninfluenced by the order

passed by the Adjudicating Authority or this Appellate Tribunal. The Appeal

stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations.

[Justice S. J. Mukhopadhaya] Chairperson

[Justice A.I.S. Cheema] Member (Judicial)

[Kanthi Narahari] Member (Technical)

Ash/GC

Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 655 of 2019 Page 3 of 3