2023 (11) TMI 108 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Appeal Dismissed: Claim Rejected as Financial Debt for Missing IBBI Timelines; Tribunal Supports Adjudicating Authority Decision.

Suraksha Realty Ltd. Versus Anuj Bajpai Resolution Professional of Panache Aluminium Extrusion Pvt. Ltd.

The Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal against the rejection of a claim as a Financial Debt under Section 5(8) of the Code. The Appellant's claim was ... Seeking direction from the Adjudicating Authority to accept the claim as a Financial Debt under the provision of Section 5(8) of I&B Code - Appellant submits that since the Application for approval of Resolution plan is still pending before the Adjudicating Authority, the order can be passed to consider the claim of the Appellant - HELD THAT:- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in recent Judgment in M/S. RPS INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. VERSUS MUKUL KUMAR & ANR. [2023 (9) TMI 516 - SUPREME COURT] has already taken the view that after approval of the plan by the CoC, the claims cannot be entertained. There is no dispute with the facts that the claim was filed by the Appellant after approval of the plan by the CoC. The Appellant has also not been able to show that claim of the Appellant was reflected in the records of the Corporate Debtor. Thus, no error has been committed by the Adjudicating Authority rejecting I.A. There is no merit in the Appeal, the Appeal is dismissed. Issues Involved:- Appeal against the rejection of a claim as a Financial Debt under Section 5(8) of the Code.Summary:The Appellate Tribunal heard an appeal against the rejection of a claim as a Financial Debt under Section 5(8) of the Code by the Adjudicating Authority. The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor commenced on December 31, 2019. The Appellant failed to file the claim within the specified timeline, and a Resolution Plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors on March 30, 2021. The Appellant filed its claim after the plan approval, leading to the rejection of the claim by the Adjudicating Authority.The Adjudicating Authority observed that the claim was filed after the approval of the Resolution Plan, which is not in accordance with the timelines prescribed under the IBBI Regulations. Citing a Supreme Court judgment, it was emphasized that claims cannot be entertained after the approval of the plan as it would disrupt the resolution process. The Adjudicating Authority concluded that admitting the claim at that stage would jeopardize the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.The Appellant argued that since the Resolution plan approval was pending before the Adjudicating Authority, the claim should be considered. However, the Tribunal noted a recent Supreme Court judgment stating that claims cannot be entertained post-approval of the plan by the Committee of Creditors. The Tribunal found no error in the Adjudicating Authority's decision to reject the claim and dismissed the appeal, stating that the claim was not reflected in the records of the Corporate Debtor.