Appellant's inconsistent stance on debt vs investment leads to dismissal of IBC appeal & cost imposition.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Dismissal of Section 7 application under IBC by Adjudicating Authority upheld. Appellant argued amount of interest could be claimed u/s 7, but failed to notify Adjudicating Authority about alleged bonafide mistake in Section 9 application where it averred amount was an investment instead of loan. Appellant paid principal amount but pursued appeal for interest. Held, filing Section 7 petition after taking contrary stance in Section 9 application is an abuse of process. Appellant's conduct deprecated as unacceptable practice of changing stance as per convenience, dragging respondent into unnecessary litigation. Appeal dismissed with cost of Rs. 1 lakh imposed on appellant, payable to respondent within 30 days.....