2019 (2) TMI 1987

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o admission of Section 7 application (CP 870/I&BP/NCLT/MB/2017) filed by a Financial Creditor. The present Miscellaneous Application has been preferred under section 60(50)(c) of I&BC by Dr. Ramakant Suryanath Pande, the Financial Creditor of the Corporate Debtor for the reliefs sought hereunder: i. Declare the communication dated 19.11.2018 by the Respondent to the Applicant rejecting his claim as unlawful, illegal and untenable, and to set aside the same; ii. Direct the Respondent to accept the claim of the Applicant as submitted under cover of the claim form dated 01.11.2018; iii. Direct the Respondent to consider the Applicant as a financial creditor for the purposes of the resolution plan approved by the comm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Respondent. MA 470 of 2018 was dismissed on the ground that the Applicant was unable to prove that the Corporate Debtor had been paying interest upon the loan provided by the Applicant. 5. Dismissal order of MA 470 of 2018 was challenged in the Hon'ble NCLAT being Company appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 525 of 2018 and the appeal was allowed vide Order dated 26.10.2018, directing the applicant to file a fresh claim before the Respondent setting out the details of the TDS amount paid by the Corporate Debtor. The matter was remanded back to the Respondent. The Applicant filed Intervention Application No. 76 of 2018 seeking permission to intervene in the main CP 870/2018 to make submissions regarding the given Miscellaneous Application in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... own books of accounts. 9. Furthermore, the mere fact that there was no express agreement or understanding as to Financial Debt between the Applicant and the Corporate debtor, does not lead to the conclusion that the loan granted by the Applicant is in the nature of Quasi-Capital. The Respondent expressly admits that the amounts advanced was for the purpose of a future gain. Merely because the erstwhile directors of the Corporate debtor had refunded some amount of the Applicant does not deny the fact that the amount granted was for time value of money and interest has also been duly paid on such amount. 10. Furthermore, it is noticed that the scope of a resolution professional (RP) is limited to verifying the claims received in t....