M/S Libra Auto & General Finance Ltd vs Rajeev Bhambri. Resolution ...
- CitationComp. App. (AT) (Ins) No.764 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a creditor's claim in insolvency is rejected as time-barred in respect of the principal, the Adjudicating Authority's finding on that limitation point stands, but a claim for interest under the same loan agreement, which the Adjudicating Authority has not examined, must be considered afresh and is not automatically barred merely because the principal claim is time-barred. The Adjudicating Authority, being empowered under Section 60(5) to examine any application arising out of insolvency, has full jurisdiction to consider all issues relating to the admission of a claim or part of a claim, including a claim for interest.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
M/s. Libra Auto & General Finance Ltd. ....Appellant
Vs.
Rajeev Bhambri, ....Respondent RP, Future Colonizers & Construction Limited
Present: For Appellant: Ms. Harsheen M. Palli, Advocate For Respondent: Ms. Aslam Ahmed, Advocate
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
19.12.2024 - Heard learned Counsel for the Appellant as well as the
learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent.
2. This Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 12.01.2024 passed by
the Adjudicating Authority in I.A. No.689 of 2023. The I.A. was filed by the
Appellant seeking a direction to admit the claim of the Appellant which was
refused to be admitted by the Resolution Professional. The Adjudicating
Authority by impugned Order has rejected the claim as barred by time. The
submission which has been made by the learned Counsel for the Appellant is
that as per loan agreement dated 14th January, 2013, there was an interest
liability on monthly basis and even if the principal amount was barred by time,
the interest liability will continue and the claim ought to have been admitted.
Learned Counsel for the Respondent opposed the submission of the Appellant 2
and submits that the interest liability cannot run when the principal amount is
itself barred by time. It is submitted that in its loan claim for interest cannot be
accepted which is contrary to the provisions of the Interest Act.
3. We have considered the submissions of the learned Counsel for the parties
and perused the records. In so far as the finding of the Adjudicating Authority
that principal claim was barred by time, we see no reason to interfere with that
finding hence the rejection of the claim of the principal amount is affirmed. In so
far as the question of the admission of the claim towards the interest, the same
issue has not been gone into by the Adjudicating Authority, we are of the view
that in so far as the claim of the Appellant towards the interest is concerned, the
Adjudicating Authority may examine the said claim afresh after hearing both the
parties.
4. We make it clear that we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of
the claim of the either of the parties. It is for the Adjudicating Authority to
consider and take a decision whether any claim towards interest can be admitted
or not. Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that the Adjudicating
Authority cannot go to the issue of interest, we do not find any substance in the
submission of the learned Counsel for the Respondent. Adjudicating Authority
who is empowered to examine any application under Section 60(5) as is entitled
to examine all issues which arises out of insolvency hence the Adjudicating
Authority has full jurisdiction to consider all issues pertaining to admission of
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No.764 of 2024 3
the claim or part of the claim. We thus reject the above submission of the
Respondent.
5. In view of the aforesaid, we dispose of the Appeal by remitting the matter
to the limited extent as indicated above for consideration.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) rs/nn
Comp. App. (AT) (Ins) No.764 of 2024
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