Appellant's late apartment claim filed after resolution plan approval entitled to only 50% principal under Clause 18.4(xi)

NCLAT Principal Bench held that appellant's claim for apartment conveyance deed was filed late on 07.02.2020, not 11.01.2019 as claimed. The tribunal found appellant failed to file claim per public announcement requirements at specified address/email, despite being aware of proper procedure from earlier plot claim filing. Since resolution plan was approved on 04.09.2019 before appellant's claim submission, appellant was entitled only to 50% principal amount under Clause 18.4(xi) for late claims. Request for possession and conveyance deed execution was denied. Appeal disposed.

---

---

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The judgment primarily revolves around the following core legal issues:

• Whether the Appellant's claim regarding the apartment was filed on 11.01.2019 or 07.02.2020, and the implications of this on the Appellant's entitlement under the Resolution Plan.
• Whether the Appellant's claim is covered under Clause 18.4 (xi) or (xix) of the approved Resolution Plan.
• Whether the Appellant is entitled to the full amount of the principal or only 50% as per the Resolution Plan.
• Whether the Appellant's request for the execution of the Conveyance Deed and possession of the apartment is legally tenable under the approved Resolution Plan.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

First Issue: Date of Claim Submission

• Relevant legal framework and precedents: The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) and the public announcement made under Regulation 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016, which required claims to be submitted by a specified date.
• Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal analyzed the evidence and pleadings, concluding that the claim was not filed on 11.01.2019 as alleged by the Appellant. The claim was actually submitted on 07.02.2020, after the approval of the Resolution Plan by the Committee of Creditors (CoC).
• Key evidence and findings: The Appellant's own pleadings admitted that the claim for the apartment was not initially filed due to a pending consumer complaint. The public announcement required claims to be submitted by email or at a New Delhi address, which was not done by the Appellant.
• Application of law to facts: The Tribunal found that the Appellant did not comply with the procedural requirements for claim submission as outlined in the public announcement.
• Treatment of competing arguments: The Respondent argued that the claim was filed late, which the Tribunal accepted based on the evidence.
• Conclusions: The Tribunal concluded that the claim was filed on 07.02.2020, not 11.01.2019.

Second Issue: Coverage under Resolution Plan Clauses

• Relevant legal framework and precedents: Clause 18.4 (xi) and (xix) of the approved Resolution Plan, which outline the treatment of claims filed after the cut-off date.
• Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal interpreted Clause 18.4 (xi) as applicable to the Appellant's claim, which was filed after the approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC.
• Key evidence and findings: The Resolution Plan was approved on 23.08.2019, and the Appellant's claim was filed on 07.02.2020, making it subject to the provisions of Clause 18.4 (xi).
• Application of law to facts: The Tribunal applied Clause 18.4 (xi) to determine that the Appellant is entitled to only 50% of the principal amount.
• Treatment of competing arguments: The Appellant argued that their claim was admitted and should be covered by Clause 18.4 (xix), but the Tribunal found otherwise based on the timing of the claim submission.
• Conclusions: The Appellant's claim is covered by Clause 18.4 (xi), entitling them to a refund of 50% of the principal amount.

Third Issue: Entitlement to Full Amount or 50%

• Relevant legal framework and precedents: The provisions of the Resolution Plan and the IBC.
• Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal held that the Appellant's claim, being filed after the approval of the Resolution Plan, is entitled to 50% of the principal amount as per Clause 18.4 (xi).
• Key evidence and findings: The List of Creditors issued on 30.04.2020 included the Appellant's claim, but this did not alter the applicability of Clause 18.4 (xi).
• Application of law to facts: The Tribunal applied the Resolution Plan's provisions to determine the Appellant's entitlement.
• Treatment of competing arguments: The Appellant's argument for full entitlement was rejected based on the Resolution Plan's clear provisions.
• Conclusions: The Appellant is entitled to a refund of 50% of the principal amount.

Fourth Issue: Execution of Conveyance Deed and Possession

• Relevant legal framework and precedents: The IBC and the terms of the approved Resolution Plan.
• Court's interpretation and reasoning: The Tribunal found that the Appellant's request for possession and execution of the Conveyance Deed was not tenable under the approved Resolution Plan.
• Key evidence and findings: The Appellant's claim was not filed in time to warrant such reliefs under the Resolution Plan.
• Application of law to facts: The Tribunal applied the Resolution Plan's terms to reject the Appellant's request for possession and execution of the Conveyance Deed.
• Treatment of competing arguments: The Appellant's request was not supported by the provisions of the Resolution Plan.
• Conclusions: The Appellant is not entitled to the execution of the Conveyance Deed or possession of the apartment.

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

• Preserve verbatim quotes of crucial legal reasoning: "The Appellant never filed any claim on 11.01.2019 and the claim for the first time was filed on 07.02.2020."
• Core principles established: Claims filed after the approval of the Resolution Plan by the CoC are subject to the terms of the Plan, specifically Clause 18.4 (xi), which limits the refund to 50% of the principal amount.
• Final determinations on each issue: The Appellant's claim was filed late and is covered by Clause 18.4 (xi), entitling them to 50% of the principal amount. The request for possession and execution of the Conveyance Deed was denied.

---