Tribunal upholds Corporate Guarantee validity despite absence in accounts, directs verification and admission of claim.

The Tribunal found that the Corporate Guarantee was provided to the Respondent and Adjudicating Authority, and its absence in the Books of Accounts did not invalidate the claim. The non-invocation and non-crystallization of the Guarantee into debt were deemed irrelevant. Consequently, the Tribunal overturned the rejection of the Appellant's claim of Rs. 54,97,35,793 and directed the Resolution Professional to verify the Corporate Guarantee documents and admit the claim.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the Corporate Guarantee was made available to the Respondent No.1 and also before the Adjudicating Authority.
2. Whether not reflecting the Corporate Guarantee in the Books of Accounts invalidates the claim.
3. Whether not invoking the Corporate Guarantee and not crystallizing into debt in the Books of Corporate Debtor invalidates the claim.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Availability of Corporate Guarantee:
The Appellant contended that the Corporate Guarantee was shared with the Respondent No.1 via email on 22.01.2020 and was also filed before the Adjudicating Authority. The Respondent No.1, however, rejected the claim on 06.02.2020, stating the Corporate Guarantee was not produced. The Tribunal noted that the IRP received the Corporate Guarantee and acknowledged it in an email dated 02.02.2020. Thus, the Tribunal concluded that the Corporate Guarantee was indeed made available to the Respondent No.1 and the Adjudicating Authority, and the rejection of the claim on these grounds was without any basis.

2. Reflection in Books of Accounts:
The Appellant argued that the absence of the Corporate Guarantee in the Books of Accounts of the Corporate Debtor does not invalidate the Guarantee. The Tribunal agreed, noting that the Corporate Guarantee's existence could not be denied merely because it was not reflected in the Books of Accounts. The Tribunal emphasized that the Assignor Bank had obtained requisite Board Resolutions from both the Corporate Debtor and the Borrower, which were furnished to the Adjudicating Authority. Thus, the claim could not be invalidated based on the non-reflection in the Books of Accounts.

3. Invocation and Crystallization of Debt:
The Tribunal discussed the definition of 'claim' under Section 3(6) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, which includes a right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, fixed, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured. The Tribunal referenced the decision in Export Import Bank of India v Resolution Professional of JEKPL Pvt. Ltd., which held that the maturity of a claim or default of debt are not guiding factors for collating or updating claims. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the non-invocation of the Corporate Guarantee and its non-crystallization into debt did not invalidate the claim.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal found that the Corporate Guarantee was made available to the IRP and the Adjudicating Authority, and its non-reflection in the Books of Accounts and non-invocation did not invalidate the claim. Consequently, the Tribunal quashed and set aside the impugned order to the extent it rejected the Appellant's claim of Rs. 54,97,35,793/-. The Tribunal directed the 2nd Respondent (RP) to verify all documents related to the Corporate Guarantee and, upon verification, to admit the Appellant's claim.

Order:
a. The rejection of the Appellant's claim of Rs. 54,97,35,793/- in the Impugned Order dated 22.02.2021 is quashed and set aside.
b. The 2nd Respondent (RP) is directed to verify all documents regarding the Corporate Guarantee issued by Vasan Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.
c. After verification, the 2nd Respondent is directed to consider and admit the Appellant's claim of Rs. 54,97,35,793/-.
d. The Appeal is allowed with no orders as to costs.

---