2021 (1) TMI 387

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ii.  to condone the delay caused in submitting its claim before the Liquidator. iii.  to direct the Liquidator to admit the claim of the Applicant and to proceed to verify it in accordance with Section 38 to 40 of the IB Code. 2.  Brief fact of the case is that this Adjudicating Authority vide its order dated 27.07.2018 admitted the C.P.(I.B.) No. 152/2018 appointing IRP. The IRP in accordance with provisions of IB Code, issued Public Announcement to the Creditors and the Stakeholders to file their claims on or before 14th August, 2018, to which the Applicant was not aware of. Thereafter, this Adjudicating Authority vide its order dated 12.06.2019 passed in IA No. 78 of 2019 initiated liquidation process ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r consideration of its claim. Similarly, Section 42 of IB Code provides for a remedy and recourse against the decision of the Liquidator rejecting the claim on the  ground of delay. 5.  The Applicant further relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the matter of T.R. Rajkumar V. Motion Picture Producers Combine ltd. AIR 1942 Madras 349, wherein the Hon'ble High Court held that, "a creditor may come in and prove its debt at any time before the final distribution of the assets, but cannot disturb any dividend which is already paid. " 6.  On receipt of notice the Respondent/Liquidator appeared through its Counsel and filed reply contending that pursuant to the provision of Section 38 of the IB Code,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on-supply of transformer shifted to Corporate Debtor, which is  already recovered by invocation of Bank Guarantee. The Applicant has already invoked the Bank Guarantee of Rs. 27,58,498/- for non-supply of transformer and therefore the amount of Rs. 14,49,973/- is unreasonable and coincide with the amount of Bank Guarantee of Rs. 27,58,498/-. Thus  the claim of Rs. 14,49,973/- is already recovered by Applicant, hence, rejected. 9.  Gone through the records, heard both sides. 10.  Admittedly, out of total claim of Rs. 26,63,344/-, the Liquidator has accepted Rs. 12,13,371/- i.e. for non-repair of transformers, which were under warrantee, as the same is legitimate claim of the Applicant, subject to the approval of Adj....