TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 576
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ORDER The Appellant is Managing Director of 2nd Respondent M/s Home Connect Developers Pvt. Ltd.- the Corporate Debtor. Mr. Ranjan Kumar Bajaj, Proprietor of 1st Respondent- S.S. Enterprise filed Application under Section 7 of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short 'IBC') before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi Bench) vide (IB)-1094/ND/2019. The Application has been admitted by Impugned Order dated 25.10.2019 and thus the present Appeal. 2. The Appellant is trying to state that the transaction between the parties could not be said to be a Financial Debt but that Respondent No. 1(Respondent in short) should have been treated as Operational Creditor. 3. Respondent-Financial Creditor claimed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sit and as it was not paid back, the cheques were presented but they got dishonoured. Financial Creditor claims that a Legal Notice was sent to the Corporate Debtor and then Section 7 Application was moved. 4. The Appellant claims that the matter is a case of cross security deposit by virtue of which, both the parties were secured and in the event of failure of compliance of the execution of the construction contract and in the event of complete disregard to the admitted position of the construction, there was protection in terms of cross Security Deposit by allotment of four plots which the Corporate Debtor claimed it had allotted. The Appellant for Corporate Debtor claims that the MoU provides that in the event of non-payment of Securi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uction contract in Galactic City project of Rs. 90,00,000/- (Rupees Ninety Lakh only) to the First Party and the First Party has received the same. a. (In the First Separate MOU dated 05.09.2017 for Rs. 50 lakh agreed and signed between the parties on stamp paper no. DR229835 & 36 (two copies) one copy kept by each party) and b. (In the Second Separate MOU dated 12-09-2017 for Rs. 40 lakh as agreed and signed between the parties on stamp paper no. DR300853 & 54 (two copies one copy kept by each party). 2. The First Party will pay additional interest @ 2% per month (@ two % per month) on monthly basis to the second Party. 3. There will be a lock in period of 11 months from the date of this MOU according to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o. 4 above, the First Party. 7. In case of any default in the repayment of the security deposit amount by the first party, in that case the first party will not claim back these plots, as mentioned in Para no. 4 above, given as guarantee from the second party. 8. This agreement/MOU is signed in two original copies and one copy kept by each party. 7. It is apparent from the wordings of this MoU dated 13.09.2017 that the return of the amount was being assured with an allotment of plots and issuance of cheques. The amount was referred as loan at more than one place. As regards allotment, paragraph-11 of the Notice dated 27.11.2018 (Annexure-A9) appears to be more in the context of wording of the MoU where it is stated that....