Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Yadav vs Mr. Prabhjit Singh Soni

Vinod Kumar @ Vinod Yadav ...Appellant(s)

Versus

Prabhjit Singh Soni ...Respondent(s) Present: For Appellant : Mr. Deepak Kumar Agarwal, Shishir Srivastava, Vinay Kumar, Nikhita Ganswami, Adv. For Respondents : Mr. Aditya Madaan, Prabhav Pachory, A Pratap Singh Gaur, Adv. ORDER

(Hybrid Mode) 08.01.2026: Heard. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant and Ld. Counsel for

the Respondent.

2. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 08.07.2025 by which

I.A No. 1129 of 2025 filed by the Appellant has been rejected.

3. CIRP against the CD commenced on 30.05.2019. The RP issued

publication inviting the claims. Last date for filing the claim was 09.06.2019.

The resolution plan came to be approved by the CoC and thereafter by the

Adjudicating Authority on 04.08.2020.

4. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority filed an appeal before

the Hon'ble supreme Court which was decided on 12.02.2024 remanding the

resolution plan for reconsideration. Greater Noida Industrial Development

Authority claimed that it is a secured creditor and in the plan it has not been

considered as a secured creditors. The Hon'ble Supreme court finding that

the plan is not in accordance with law set aside the order and remanded the

matter back for reconsideration.

5. It was thereafter the Appellant filed its claim on 01.02.2024 which

claims having not been accepted. I.A No. 2086 of 2024 was filed on

22.02.2024 which was however subsequently withdrawn.

6. The Adjudicating Authority by the impugned order has rejected the

application observing that there is inordinate delay in filing the claim and plan

had been approved.

7. Ld. Counsel for the Appellant challenging the order submits that the

Appellant was not aware of the CIRP process and he although visited the site

in October, 2019 and came to know that project was stalled and it could file

the claim with delay of four years from the initiation of CIRP. It is submitted

that the allotment was made in lieu of services and material supplied, hence,

the respondent was required to consider.

8. Ld. Counsel for the RP submits that the claim which was filed by the

Appellant with inordinate delay could not be considered. The order of Hon'ble

Supreme Court by which plan was remanded for reconsideration could not

give an opportunity to file a claim.

9. We have considered the submissions of Ld. Counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

10. In the present case, the CIRP commenced on 30.05.2019, time for filing

the claim came to end on 09.06.2019 and the resolution plan was approved

by the CoC and thereafter by the Adjudicating Authority on 04.08.2020. The

Hon'ble Supreme court on an appeal filed by Greater Noida Industrial

Development Authority remanded the resolution plan for reconsideration before the Adjudicating Authority which order could not allow any benefit to

the appellant to file the claim after four years.

11. We do not find any error in the order of Adjudicating Authority in

rejecting the application filed by the Appellant seeking direction to accept his

belated claim.

12. There is no merit in the appeal. The appeal is dismissed.

[Justice Ashok Bhushan] Chairperson

[Barun Mitra] Member (Technical) Sheetal/Manu