Toyota Financial Services India Ltd vs Sapan Mohan Garg And Anr
- CitationCompany Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1449 of 2023
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
A claim by a creditor filed after the Adjudicating Authority-approved timeline, and after the Committee of Creditors has approved the resolution plan, may be rejected by the Resolution Professional and the rejection upheld by the Adjudicating Authority where the claim is filed more than two and a half years after the plan's approval by the Committee of Creditors, the Tribunal finding no error in that refusal to admit the late claim.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Toyota Financial Services India Ltd. ...Appellant
Versus
Sapan Mohan Garg & Anr. ...Respondent
Present: For Appellant: Mr. Shankar Sen, Advocate. For Respondent:
ORDER
(Hybrid Mode)
28.02.2024: Heard learned counsel for the Appellant. This Appeal has
been filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority dated
12.09.2023 in I.A. No.3643 of 2023. I.A. was filed by the Appellant seeking a
direction to accept the claim of the Applicant as Financial Creditor of M/s MK
Overseas Pvt. Ltd (Corporate Debtor). The CIRP of the Corporate Debtor
commenced on 19.09.2019. In the CIRP, the CoC approved the Resolution
Plan on 27.11.2020. Appellant filed its claim only on 23.05.2023, which was
not accepted by the Resolution Professional thereafter I.A. was filed before the
Adjudicating Authority. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the application
taking the view that CIRP having commenced on 19.09.2019 and Resolution
Plan being approved by the CoC on 27.11.2020, claim at this stage cannot be
accepted.
2. Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that the application for
approval of Resolution Plan is still pending before the Adjudicating Authority.
Cont'd.../ -2-
3. Be that as it may. The Resolution Plan having approved by the CoC on
27.11.2020 and claim has been filed by the Appellant more than two and half
years thereafter, we see no error in the order of the Adjudicating Authority
rejecting I.A. No.3643 of 2023 filed by the Appellant. There is no error in the
order of the Adjudicating Authority warranting any interference. Appeal is
dismissed.
[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson
[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical)
[Arun Baroka] Member (Technical) Archana/nn
Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.1449 of 2023
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