Tribunal dismisses applications lacking evidence of direct relationship with Corporate Debtor

The Tribunal dismissed the applications in IA-4564 & IA-4885/2020 due to lack of evidence establishing a direct relationship with the Corporate Debtor. The applicants' claims of paying money to a third party for flats in the project were rejected as no jural relationship was proven. In IA-4514/2020, the applicant's request to be classified as a Financial Creditor was denied after changing stance post-resolution plan approval, with the Tribunal emphasizing the need to maintain consistency and adherence to legal principles in the resolution process.

---

---

Issues:
1. Dispute over claims made by applicants who paid money to a third party for flats in a project of the Corporate Debtor.
2. Applicant claiming to be a decree holder for refund of money and seeking classification as a Financial Creditor.

Analysis:

1. Dispute over Claims by Applicants:
The Applicants in IA-4564 & IA-4885/2020 claimed to have paid money to a third party for flats in the Corporate Debtor project. However, the Resolution Professional rejected their claims, stating there was no proof of a jural relationship between the applicants and the Corporate Debtor. The Tribunal found no merit in the applicants' arguments, emphasizing that the documents provided did not establish a direct relationship with the developer. The money paid to the alleged agent was not deposited with the Corporate Debtor, and no allotment letters were issued. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed both applications, highlighting that no obligation could be imposed on the Corporate Debtor based solely on payments made to a third party.

2. Applicant Seeking Classification as Financial Creditor:
In IA-4514/2020, an applicant claimed to be a decree holder for refund of money and sought classification as a Financial Creditor. Initially, the Resolution Professional admitted the claim as requested by the applicant. However, after the approval of the resolution plan by the CoC, the applicant filed a new application seeking alteration of his status as a separate financial creditor. The Tribunal dismissed the application, noting that the applicant had previously filed Form-CA based on the RERA decree to be considered as a financial creditor in class. Changing his stance after the plan's approval was deemed misconceived, as the applicant had remained silent for over seven months before seeking a change in classification.

In conclusion, the Tribunal resolved the disputes by dismissing the applications based on the lack of evidence establishing a direct relationship with the Corporate Debtor in the first case and the applicant's inconsistent stance regarding his classification as a Financial Creditor in the second case. The decisions were made to maintain the integrity of the resolution process and adhere to established legal principles.

---