TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (12) TMI 767
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ates. For Respondent : Mr. Arun Aggarwal, Mr. Lovelesh Kukreja & Mr. Anmol Gupta, for R-2. JUDGMENT [Per: Justice Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, Member (Judicial)] The instant appeal is filed by the appellant under Section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ('Code') against the order dated 05.04.2024 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Court No. 2, passed in IA 997/NCLT/AHM/2023 in CP (IB) 38/NCLT/AHM/2020, whereby the application filed by the appellant has been dismissed. 2. Brief facts of this appeal are that appellant had entered into a Credit agreement with corporate debtor Sumeet Industries Limited where by the appellant granted a term loan facility of up to EUR 10,444,450 to the corporate de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Interim Resolution Professional. 6. The appellant filed its claim under regulation 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 under Form C for an amount of EUR 8284427.15, however, the RP admitted the claim of the appellant in part only for INR 11,14,28,564/-. The appellant made several Communications with the RP and when no fruitful result was achieved he moved an application bearing IA No 997 of 2023 challenging the IRP decision of partially rejecting the claim of the appellant and the said application has been rejected by learned Tribunal by passing the impugned order. 7. In the meantime, after filing of the appeal the adjudicating authority has appr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... NCLT. 11. It is also submitted that the RP as well as the adjudicating authority failed to understand that the default of the corporate debtor would not automatically trigger indemnity payment under the buyer credit cover and in the event of default of the corporate debtor the appellant is under certain circumstances entitled to an indemnity payment being a portion of the loan amount under the buyer credit cover, is irrespective of whether the appellant has been indemnified by the Federal Republic of Germany or not, the appellant is obliged to enforce the entire outstanding claim against the corporate debtor and all appropriate measures including filing of proof of claim in Form C to collect the entire loan amount in relation to such cl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s dates on which the claim has arisen, filed and preferred by the appellant and how the part of the claim has been admitted by the RP if the same was barred by limitation and also as whether this issue was existing before the tribunal at all and also whether any discussion has been made by the tribunal in the background of various provisions of the buyer credit guarantee policy, he fairly submits that it would be better if the matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority for deciding these issues afresh. 15. Learned Counsel for the respondent No. 2/ SRA is also of the view that it would be better if the matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority for decision afresh. 16. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aim examined and accepted the amount eligible. There two glaring omissions in the claim submission by the applicant. The date of default and notice have clearly exceeded the period of limitation and the submission of this application with prayers to direct the RP to accept the entire amount. If a loan has been granted and there is a default the period of exercising the action to recover runs in to a certain limitation period as per the Act irrespective of whether the applicant exercises his cover. Whether the claim was eligible to be considered is for the RP to examine the matter. No documents have been submitted and the details of when the amount of cover was invoked and amounts realised. On confidentiality the applicant has not shared the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....claim of the appellant is barred by limitation or how the appellant would be unjustly benefitted in the background of the indemnity amount received by him from the Federal Government of Germany under buyer coverage insurance policy, even no clause of this policy, which was available on record, has been considered. In our considered view a casual approach appears to have been adopted by Learned Tribunal while disposing of the application moved by the appellant. 19. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent No.1 and 2 have already fairly conceded that it is a case which should be remanded back to the Learned Tribunal for decision afresh and we are also of the same view that since the Learned Tribunal has not discussed any factual matrix in order to a....