https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751450 NCLAT Principal Bench dismissed appeal challenging admission of financial creditor's claim. Appellant argued that Deed of Security dated 20.03.2020 discharged its obligations under financing documents, but tribunal held the deed created additional security through mortgage of 2,00,000 sq. ft. carpet area as contemplated in Consent Term. The deed did not novate or discharge original financial obligations, with appellant remaining liable for repayment. Section 41 discharge provisions were inapplicable. Supreme Court precedent in Venkataraman Krishnamurthy was distinguished on facts. Adjudicating Authority correctly interpreted agreements and admitted financial creditor's claim. en-us Mon, 15 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Apr 2024 13:13:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751450 NCLAT Principal Bench dismissed appeal challenging admission of financial creditor's claim. Appellant argued that Deed of Security dated 20.03.2020 discharged its obligations under financing documents, but tribunal held the deed created additional security through mortgage of 2,00,000 sq. ft. carpet area as contemplated in Consent Term. The deed did not novate or discharge original financial obligations, with appellant remaining liable for repayment. Section 41 discharge provisions were inapplicable. Supreme Court precedent in Venkataraman Krishnamurthy was distinguished on facts. Adjudicating Authority correctly interpreted agreements and admitted financial creditor's claim. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Mon, 15 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751450