Ntpc Ltd. (Simhadri Project) vs Rajiv Chakraborty

NTPC LTD. (SIMHADRI PROJECT) Appellant(s)

VERSUS

RAJIV CHAKRABORTY Respondent(s)

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

The limited issue in this appeal is about the claim

of the appellant not being reflected under the heading ‘Claims of Operational Creditors’ in the Information Memorandum prepared by the Resolution Professional.

The Adjudicating Authority and the Appellate Tribunal

have taken a view that the appellant’s claim is already noted in Information Memorandum under the title, ‘List of Other Creditor Claims (excluding Related Party Claims and Employees and Workmen Claims) as on 17 th July, 2019’. No grievance has been made by the appellant that the figure noted therein is incorrect.

According to the appellant, the claim amount should

DEEPAK SINGH

been reflected under the heading ‘Claims of Operational Creditors’. We do not agree with this submission.

2 It is not in dispute that the claim of the appellant is still pending adjudication before the Arbitrator and it has been, therefore, rightly described in the memorandum as other creditor claims (claims under adjudication).

The purpose of memorandum is only to provide relevant information regarding the financial position of the company in question. It is not about deciding the claim or disregarding the claim amount, if it exists in law.

The Resolution Professional has no authority/power to accept or disallow the claims. The appellant’s claim would not get extinguished unless it is adjudicated upon by a competent forum or by operation of law.

Suffice it to observe that the claim of the appellant has been taken note of in the information memorandum and does not get extinguished as such; but it will be subject to adjudication by the Arbitrator. Since it is part of the memorandum, it is obvious that the resolution applicant would take the same into account while submitting his proposal, due notice whereof will be taken by the committee of creditors as well, and dealt with appropriately in the final resolution plan.

In the event, the appellant has any grievance about 3 the nature or manner of provision made in the final resolution plan qua its claim; and if aggrieved with the final resolution plan, may take recourse to appropriate remedy as per law.

All contentions available to the appellant in that regard are left open while once again making it clear that the claim of the appellant has not been treated as extinguished.

In view of the above, the civil appeal is disposed of.

As the appeal is disposed of, the interim order passed earlier stands vacated.

As a result of which, we expect the concerned authorities to expedite the process of resolution.

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

…...................J

(A.M. KHANWILKAR)

…...................J

(B.R. GAVAI)

…...................J

(HRISHIKESH ROY)

New Delhi November 16, 2020 4 ITEM NO.2 Court 4 (Video Conferencing) SECTION XVII

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Civil Appeal No(s). 2798/2020 NTPC LTD. (SIMHADRI PROJECT) Appellant(s)

VERSUS

RAJIV CHAKRABORTY Respondent(s)

(IA No. 79427/2020 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION)

Date : 16-11-2020 These matters were called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY

For Appellant(s)

Mr. Tushar Mehta, S.G.

Mr. Adarsh Tripathi, Adv.

Mr. Gaurav, AOR For Respondent(s)

Mr. C.U. Singh, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Vanita Bhargava, AOR Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Adv.

Mr. Siddharth Srivastava, Adv.

Mr. Mohit Kishore, Adv.

Ms. Warmika Trehan, Adv.

Mr. Shivank Diddi, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

The Civil Appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed order.

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(DEEPAK SINGH) (VIDYA NEGI)

COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)

[Signed order is placed on the file]