AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1834
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ects Limited has obtained financial facilities amounting to Rs. 63 crore from the Yes Bank. Account of AKME Projects Limited was declared as Non-Performing Asset (NPA) by Yes Bank. AKME Projects Limited has mortgaged its land admeasuring 9.856 acres. ii. Appellant claims that AKME Projects Limited in its Project AKME Raga Limited allotted 3 flats to the appellant on 09.03.2015 in lieu of appellant's professional legal fee. iii. Yes Bank issued a notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 to M/s. AKME Projects Limited on 23.09.2024. iv. The Bank filed an application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 before the District Magistrate, Gurgaon, Haryana for taking possession of the asset/property. v. In the application which was filed by the Yes Bank, AKME Projects Limited appeared before the District Magistrate and filed the reply. It was pleaded that auction process by the Bank will adversely affect the rights of third parties. vi. The AKME Projects Limited itself annexed the list of 221 allottees in its reply. The District Magistrate passed an order on 10.11.2025, observing that secured creditors is entitled to take posses....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ation which has not been considered. It is submitted that the appellant's firm stood dissolved on 15.07.2022 and Arbitration Proceedings is going on and there was no authorised person to take steps, due to which the delay was caused in filing the claim. It is submitted that adjudicating authority committed error in not condoning the delay in filing the claim and further adjudicating authority has erroneously distinguished the judgment of this Tribunal in 'Puneet Kaur' Vs. 'K.V. Developers Private Limited & Ors.', reported in [2022 SCC OnLine NCLAT 245]. It is submitted that order passed by District Magistrate, Gurgaon on 10.11.2025 did not contain any list of 221 allottees. It is submitted that notice of sale was "as is where is", "as is what is" and "whatever is basis", hence the right of the appellant who was allotted units by AKME Projects Limited was fully protected. The corporate debtor took the assets "as is where is basis", hence it was bound to discharge the liability of the appellant. It is submitted that AKME Projects Limited has issued the allotment letters and has also entered into Flat Buyers Agreement in March, 2015. Appellant's claim has wrongly been rejected. RP com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ge 354 to 356 of the appeal paper book. Claim was not admitted both on the ground of filing delay as well as on merits. The reply of the RP mentioned that name of the appellant is not included in the list of 221 allottees which are part of the order of District Magistrate dated 10.11.2025. CIRP was initiated by the homebuyers for not honouring the liabilities as per District Magistrate order dated 10.11.2025, hence the claim of the appellant cannot be dealt with in the CIRP of the corporate debtor. 8. Coming to the submission of the appellant that adjudicating authority committed error in not condoning the delay, we need to notice the reasons given by adjudicating authority in not accepting the claim of the appellant. Reliance on the judgment of this Tribunal in 'Puneet Kaur' (supra) was also considered. Adjudicating authority observed that judgment of 'Puneet Kaur' (supra) was with respect to plight of the poor homebuyers and cannot be taken benefit by firm as the appellant. It was also noticed by the adjudicating authority that plan has already been approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and is under consideration before the adjudicating authority. This Tribunal in 'Pune....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... That they were litigating against the corporate debtor is an undoubted fact. We believe that the appellant ought to have been vigilant enough in the aforesaid circumstances to find out whether the corporate debtor was undergoing CIRP. The appellant has been deficient on this aspect. The result, of course, is that the appellant to an extent has been left high and dry." 10. The reasons given by the adjudicating authority in refusing to condone the delay in filing the claim by the appellant a legal firm cannot be said to arbitrary or without any basis. Admittedly, the resolution plan was approved by the CoC much before filing of the claim by the appellant and plan is pending consideration before the adjudicating authority. Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'RPS Infrastructure Ltd.' (supra) was also case where claim of a commercial entity was under consideration. Appellant is a legal firm which cannot place on the same footing as homebuyers of a residential unit, whose case was under consideration in 'Puneet Kaur' (supra). 11. We thus are of the view that no error has been committed by the adjudicating authority in refusing to condone the delay in filing the claim by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent of Security Interest Act, 2002 and in exercise of the powers conferred under section 13 read with Rule 9 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) rules, 2002 sold on behalf of the YES Bank Ltd in favour of M/s Grandstar Realty Pvt. Ltd. having registered office at H-65, Connaught Circus, New Delhi- 110001, the immovable property shown in the schedule below secured in favour of YES Bank Ltd by M/s Akme Projects Ltd, having registered Office at B-1/E-3, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate, Mathura Road New Delhi 110044 towards the financial facilities offered by YES Bank Ltd. The undersigned acknowledges the receipt of INR. 40.75 Crore/- (Rupees Forty Crores Seventy Five Lakhs only) being. the sale price in full as the highest bid amount in the auction and handed over the delivery and possession of the scheduled property. The sale of the scheduled property was made free from all encumbrances known to the secured creditor listed below on deposit of the money demanded by the undersigned. Description of the Immovable property All that part and parcel of the property in Village Lakhnaula, Tehsil Manesar, District Gurgaon, Haryana measuring 9.856 acres out of total 10.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te Debtor (GRPL). Since the CIRP is initiated by Home Buyers for not honoring the liabilities as per district magistrate order dated 10.11.2015, therefore, your claim cannot be dealt in the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor (GRPL )and the same is not liable to be admitted in the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor (GRPL). Suggested Action However, your claim can be addressed in the CIRP of Akme Projects Ltd., which is also under process, stayed earlier and now an application for extension of CIRP period is pending with Hon'ble NCLAT. You are therefore requested to forward your claim to the following email id of Akme Projects Ltd., if the same was not filed earlier; [email protected]" 16. We thus do not find any substance in the submission of the appellant that claim of the appellant was also entitled to be accepted as obligation of the corporate debtor. 17. Learned counsel for the respondent has raised one more submission to support his case. It is submitted that allotment which is claimed by the appellant is in lieu of legal fee which was to be received from AKME Projects Limited and AKME Projects Limited has made allotment to the appellant in lieu of legal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....against the consideration for the time value of money, in our view, remains an essential part even in respect of any of the transactions/dealings stated in clauses (a) to (i) of Section 5(8), even if it is not necessarily stated therein. In any case, the definition, by its very frame, cannot be read so expansive, rather infinitely wide, that the root requirements of "disbursement" against "the consideration for the time value of money" could be forsaken in the manner that any transaction could stand alone to become a financial debt. In other words, any of the transactions stated in the said clauses (a) to (i) of Section 5(8) would be falling within the ambit of "financial debt" only if it carries the essential elements stated in the principal clause or at least has the features which could be traced to such essential elements in the principal clause. In yet other words, the essential element of disbursal, and that too against the consideration for time value of money, needs to be found in the genesis of any debt before it may be treated as "financial debt" within the meaning of Section 5(8) of the Code. This debt may be of any nature but a part of it is always required to be carryi....