Miss Lucy
← All judgments

In the matter of Future Retail Ltd.

National Company Law Tribunal15 January 2024

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

A creditor's claim in corporate insolvency resolution proceedings cannot be admitted against the corporate debtor where the documents supporting the claim show that the debt is owed by a separate corporate entity, even if that entity is a group company of the corporate debtor and is not itself under insolvency proceedings; mere group affiliation does not make the separate entity's liability a liability of the corporate debtor. Where the claimant's remedy lies against a separate legal entity, the claimant must enforce its claim against that entity before the appropriate forum, and the resolution professional's rejection of a claim so framed, on the ground that it is not owed by the corporate debtor, is not illegal or infirm.

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

Judgment

As delivered

IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNALMUMBAI BENCH, COURT -IIIA No.2301/2023InC.P. (IB) No. 527/MB/2022Under Section 60(5) of Insolvency andBankruptcy Code, 2016 read with Rule 11 ofthe NCLT Rules, 2016M/s Exbuzz Fire and Security Pvt. Ltd.Having address at- Unit NO. 124-125,Linkway Estate, 1st Floor, Linking Road,Near Chincholi Fire Brigade, Malad (West),Mumbai-400064…. ApplicantVersusM/s Future Retail Limited(Through IRP Vijaykumar V. Iyer)Having address at- 2nd Floor, Future GroupOffice, SOBO Brand Factory, Pandit MadanMohan Malviya Marg, Cross Road, Haji Ali,Tardeo, Mumbai- 400034…. Respondent No. 1Vijay V. Iyer(Interim Resolution Professional for FutureRetail Limited, Deloitte India InsolvencyProfessionals LLP, One InternationalCentre, Tower 3, 32nd Floor, SenapatiBapat Marg, Elphinstone Road (West),Mumbai- 400013…. Respondent No. 2IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, COURT-II, MUMBAI BENCHIA No. 2301/2023InC.P. (IB) No. 527/MB/2022In the matter ofBank of India…Financial CreditorVersusFuture Retail Limited…Corporate DebtorOrder Delivered on :- 15/01/2024Coram:Mr. Anil Raj Chellan Mr. Kuldip Kumar KareerMember (Technical) Member (Judicial)Appearances:For the Applicant : NoneFor the Respondent : Adv. Harit LakhaniORDER

Per: - Mr. Kuldip Kumar Kareer, (Member Judicial) 1. The present Interlocutory Application has been filed by the Applicant i.e. M/s Exbuzz Fire and Security Pvt. Ltd. against the rejection of claim submitted with the Resolution Professional. It has been prayed as under in the application: - (i). Take the present application on record into consideration; and IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, COURT-II, MUMBAI BENCH IA No. 2301/2023 In C.P. (IB) No. 527/MB/2022 (ii). Direct the RP to re-consider, re-examine and/or accept the claim on the basis of the accounts and evidence and if the evidence corroborates the claim, the same should also be taken into account while finalizing the claim of the Applicant herein as per rules; (iii) Directed the RP to consider the evidence filed in support of claim and seek further documents, evidence or information, is so needed; and (iv) Pass such other/further appropriate Order(s), Direction(s) as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon’ble Court under the facts and circumstances of the present case.

2. The application has been resisted by the Respondent/Resolution Professional. In the reply filed by the Resolution Professional, it has been pleaded that the Applicant submitted a claim form dated 10.08.2022 in (Form-B) claiming an amount of Rs. 99,30,032.03/-. It is further submitted in the reply that on perusal of the documents submitted by the Applicant along with claim Form-B, it was found that the claim was not against the Corporate Debtor but against Future Market Networks Limited which is a different entity. Thereafter, an email dated 30.10.2022 was sent to the Applicant to produce relevant documents i.e. ledger copies etc. to substantiate the claim. In its reply email dated 31.10.2022, all the documents submitted by the Applicant pertain to Future Market Networks Limited with the result that the claim could not be verified by the Respondent/Resolution Professional. The other averments made in the application have been denied as wrong and, in the end, a prayer for dismissal of the application has also been made.

3. In the rejoinder filed by the Applicant, it has been claimed that the Future Retail Private Limited and Future Market Networks Limited are part of the IN THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, COURT-II, MUMBAI BENCH IA No. 2301/2023 In C.P. (IB) No. 527/MB/2022 same group and only an artificial divide has been created between the sister companies and the claim of the Applicant cannot be deflected on this false and frivolous ground.

4. We have heard the Counsel for the Resolution Professional and gone through the record.

5. On perusal of the record reveals that all the documents submitted by the Applicant along with the claim form clearly indicate that so-called claim amount is shown to be due from Future Market Networks Limited. The ledger account annexed by the Applicant with the claim form also refers to Future Market Networks Limited. It has not been disputed that Future Market Networks Limited is a separate corporate entity and is not in CIRP. Therefore, merely on account of the fact that, it is a group company of the Corporate Debtor, the claim cannot be admitted against the CIRP. The remedy available with the Applicant is to proceed against M/s Further Market Networks Limited to enforce its claims, if any, before any appropriate forum or a court of law having the competent jurisdiction in the matter. The Resolution Professional has rightly rejected the claim and there is no illegality or infirmity in the treatment of the claim by the Resolution Professional.

6. As a result of the above discussion, the IA No. 2301/2023 is dismissed as disposed of as being devoid of any merits.

Sd/- Sd/- ANIL RAJ CHELLAN KULDIP KUMAR KAREER (MEMBER TECHNICAL) (MEMBER JUDICIAL)

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