TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (6) TMI 282
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncial creditor, against Vista Mining Private Limited, the corporate debtor in underlying company petition bearing CP (IB) No. 146/KB/2019 under section 7 of the Code, this Adjudicating Authority had admitted the corporate debtor into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) on 25.02.2020. 4. On 29.02.2020, the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) published the Public Announcement in Form A and invited the creditors of the corporate debtor to submit their proof of claim by 12.03.2020. However, due to ailing health and advent of Covid-19 pandemic and the subsequent lockdown imposed on 25.03.2020, the Applicant could not file the claim either before the IRP or the RP. The Applicant had extended an inter corporate deposit of Rs. 55,00,000/- (Rupees fifty-five lakh only) to the corporate debtor. The Applicant reiterates that due to the lockdown and the social distancing norms imposed to prevent the spread of the virus, the entire operation of the Applicant was closed. 5. It was only on 02.11.2020 that the Applicant came to know of the publication of Form A. The Applicant on 24.12.2020 duly submitted its proof of claim in Form C disclosing all the necessary documents through an ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sion of claims for the Dhandhania Brothers Private Limited and RD Fan Limited. The Respondent replied to both the emails on 26.12.2020. 14. On 26.12.2020, the Respondent received another email pertaining to submission of claim for Dhandhania Electronics Limited. Since the names Dhandhania Brothers Private Limited and Dhandhania Electronics Limited are similar, the Respondent mistook the email from Dhandhania Electronics Limited to be a repetition of Dhandhania Brothers Private Limited and, therefore, overlooked the same. 15. After receipt of the present application, the Respondent vide an email dated 03.05.2021, rejected the claim filed by the Applicant on ground that the same was submitted way beyond the period of ninety days from the initiation of CIRP. A copy of the said email of rejection is annexed to the affidavit in reply as Annexure A at pages 9 and 10. 16. Admittedly, the Applicant came to know about the initiation of CIRP on 02.11.2020, however, the claim was not filed by the Applicant until 24.12.2020. Further, the claim has been filed after the period of seven months from the expiry of ninety days as provided in the Code. Furthermore, the present application has been....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....present application was filed after one month of rejection of claim as it has been admitted by the Respondent that such rejection was informed only on 03.05.2021. 25. The present application was listed on 09.02.2021 and the Resolution Plan had not been put to vote until 26.02.2021. In this regard the Applicant reiterates its reliance on Twenty First Century Wire Rods Limited (supra) and Surya Pharmaceuticals Limited (supra) for the proposition that till the time a Resolution Plan was being considered, a creditor's claim can be considered; the RP must consider such claim without rejecting the same on grounds of delay. 26. The has failed to consider the claim of the Applicant in a manner that is unjust, unfair and contrary to the directions passed by the Adjudicating Authority time and again. The judgment in Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Pvt. Ltd. v. Adel Landmark Pvt. Ltd. (Supra) had also been brought to the knowledge of the Respondent. 27. It is submitted that though the Resolution Plan has been approved by the long before the said approval on 24.12.2020. Even the present application was on 27.01.2021 which is a month prior to the approval of the said Resolution Plan. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....handhania Brothers Private Limited and RD Fan Limited filed with the RP on 24.12.2020 had also been rejected by the RP on 26.12.2020, had the RP not mistaken Applicant's e-mail to be a repetition of claim as aforesaid, he would have, in all probability, rejected the Applicant's claim too on the same ground that it was filed beyond the stipulated time period. 34. Moving ahead, the Applicant first submitted that due to ill health and outbreak of Covid-19 which resulted in lockdown being imposed from 25.03.2020, it failed to submit its claim with the IRP and then the RP. The Applicant later submitted that it was only on 02.11.2020 that it came to know about the CIRP of the corporate debtor. If it was only on 02.11.2020 that the Applicant came to know about the CIRP, a claim could definitely not have been filed by it before 02.11.2020, be the Applicant sick (no document supporting which has been filed) or the nation under lockdown (that had been lifted in parts since October 2020). 35. Further, the Applicant came to know about the CIRP on 02.11.2020 but it filed its claim with the RP only either on 24.12.2020 or on 26.12.2020, which is almost two months after it came to know ....