Soham Coal Private Limited vs Vinod Tarachand Agrawal Resolution ...
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 453 of 2025
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Appellate Tribunal permitted a person who has paid money to the corporate debtor under an agreement to sell, and who has confined its prayer to filing a claim, to submit that claim to the Resolution Professional within two weeks, the Resolution Professional being directed to verify and collate the claim in accordance with law; the tribunal expressly declined to decide any other prayer or issue.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE MATTER OF: Soham Coal Pvt. Ltd. ...Appellants Versus Vinod Tarachand Agrawal, ...Respondents RP of Kingston Paptech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Present: For Appellant : Mr. Aman A. Mir, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Karan Valecha, Advocate for R1/ RP.
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
21.05.2025: Heard counsel for the appellant as well as Ld. Cousne
appearing for the Resolution professional (respondents herein). This appeal
has been filed against the order dated 10.01.2025 passed by the National
Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad, Division Bench, Court-1 in IA No. 40 of
2025. Ld. Counsel for the appellant during the submission confined his
prayer to prayer-c as noticed in para-1 of the impugned order which prayer is
as follows:-
"1(c) To allow the Applicant to submit its claims before the Respondent No. 1 Resolution Professional for all the amounts paid or receivable by the Applicant to Kingston Paptech Pvt. Ltd. "Corporate Debtor" under all the agreements between the Applicant and Kingston Paptech Pvt. Ltd. "Corporate Debtor' wherein Kingston Paptech Pvt. Ltd. "Corporate Debtor" has failed to perform its obligations."
Counsel for the appellant submits that the corporate debtor has
entered into agreement to sell dated 27.11.2015, under the agreement to sell part consideration was paid by the appellant and further balance was paid to
the third party as alleged on behalf of the Corporate Debtor to financial
creditor.
2. The RP has filed an application for taking possession of the assets
which was allowed on 12.12.2024 and the counsel for the RP submits that he
has already has taken possession he is in possession of the assets. Ld.
Counsel for the appellant as noted above has confined his prayer to
permitting the applicant to submit its claim before the RP for all the amount
paid or receivables by the applicant from the corporate debtor.
3. Ld. Counsel for the RP submitted that the CoC has been reconstituted
and claims have been verified.
4. In the facts of the present case we are of the view that ends of justice be
served in permitting the appellant to file a claim before the RP within two
weeks from today. Resolution professional shall proceed to verify and collate
the claim in accordance with law.
5. We make it clear that we have not considered any other prayer nor
expressing any opinion with regard to any other issue involved in the appeal.
With the aforesaid directions this appeal is disposed of.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) harleen/NN 2 of 2 Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 453 of 2025
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