https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786390 A contingent entitlement under a collaboration-cum-redevelopment agreement did not mature into an enforceable insolvency claim because the encumbrance over the property was never removed and the redevelopment never materialised. The assignment deed could transfer only the rights actually held by the assignor, so it did not create an independent monetary claim against the corporate debtor. A unilateral letter dated 31.03.2021 was also held insufficient to constitute an enforceable corporate guarantee, as it was not a completed, duly supported guarantee instrument and did not establish a concluded contractual liability. On that basis, refusal to update the information memorandum and rejection of the claim were upheld. en-us Fri, 06 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Feb 2026 09:03:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786390 A contingent entitlement under a collaboration-cum-redevelopment agreement did not mature into an enforceable insolvency claim because the encumbrance over the property was never removed and the redevelopment never materialised. The assignment deed could transfer only the rights actually held by the assignor, so it did not create an independent monetary claim against the corporate debtor. A unilateral letter dated 31.03.2021 was also held insufficient to constitute an enforceable corporate guarantee, as it was not a completed, duly supported guarantee instrument and did not establish a concluded contractual liability. On that basis, refusal to update the information memorandum and rejection of the claim were upheld. Case-Laws IBC Fri, 06 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786390