Sunny Grover vs Value Infracon India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1050 of 2024
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Adjudicating Authority was entitled to dispose of a homebuyer's application by following the Appellate Tribunal's earlier decision in a materially similarly situated homebuyer's case, and so long as the claimant is given liberty to approach the Swiss Resolution Authority (SRA) with details of payments made to the corporate debtor, it is for the SRA, not the Tribunal, to determine the matter on those details.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
In the matter of: Sunny Grover ....Appellant Vs. Value Infracon India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. ...Respondent For Appellant Mr. Achint Kumar, Advocate. For Respondent
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
08.07.2024: This appeal has been filed challenging the order passed by
the Adjudicating Authority dated 04.03.2024 in IA No. 6341 of 2023 filed by
the appellant. Appellant claim to be homebuyer who has filed a claim on
21.08.2023 whereas the plan was approved by the Adjudicating Authority on
28.04.2022. After approval of the plan, the claim was filed which was not
considered by the Resolution Professional, hence, IA No.6341 of 2023 was
filed. Adjudicating Authority, noticing an order of this Tribunal dated
09.02.2024 passed in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.832 of 2022 filed
by Mrs. Ranju Kumari against Value Infracon India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. i.e.
claimant who was similarly situated, disposed of the application in terms of
the order passed by this Tribunal in case of "Mrs. Ranju Kumari vs. Value
Infracon India Pvt. Ltd. & Ors".
2
2. We are of the view that the Adjudicating Authority did not commit any
error in disposing of IA of the appellant in terms of the judgment of this
Tribunal in Ranju Kumari (supra). Liberty having been given to the appellant
to approach SRA and to give details of payments given to the corporate debtor
and it was for the SRA to take a call. We, thus, are of the view that disposal of
the application of the appellant in terms of the said order is in accordance with
law and there was no ground to interfere with the order impugned. Appellant
having been given liberty, he may approach the SRA and it is for the SRA to
look into the matter.
3. Subject to above, appeal is dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Anjali/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 1050 of 2024 & I.A. No. 3817 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