Dr. Vijay Badhwar vs M/s. GRL Tires Pvt Ltd Through its Resolution Professional Mr. Pankaj Sham Joshi
INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION. No. 1773/2022 In CP(IBC)No. 3540/MB/C-II/2018
Facts:
1.Applicant had instituted a Civil Suit bearing C.S. (OS) No. 341 of 2017 against the Corporate Debtor and its promoter before the Original Side of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for recovery of amount in respect of three dishonoured cheques which was decreed in favour of the applicant.
2.Applicant filed an execution petition for enforcement of decree vide Ex. Petition No. 02/2022. The Promoter of the Corporate Debtor appeared in the execution proceedings and intimated about the initiation of the corporate insolvency resolution process (‘CIRP’) in respect of the Corporate Debtor.
3.According to the Applicant, upon intimation of CIRP, the Hon’ble High Court had directed the Corporate Debtor to furnish the details of CIRP, RP, etc. However, the same were not provided by the Corporate Debtor to the Applicant. The Applicant has somehow himself found the name of the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor. Applicant filed claim before the RP which was rejected by the RP on the ground that claim was filed belatedly.
Issue: Whether the claim can be admitted ?
Arguments:
Applicant:
1.Counsel for the Applicant submits that the delay on the part of the Applicant is not intentional and can be satisfactorily explained. Counsel for the Applicant further submits that the time limits stipulated under the IBC including under Regulation 12(2) of the IBBI (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 are directory and not mandatory in nature
Respondent:
1.RP submitted that the Corporate Debtor was admitted into CIRP vide Order of the Adjudicating Authority dated 20th December, 2019. Pursuant to the said Admission Order, the then IRP (now RP) issued a public announcement in Form ‘A’ on 22nd December, 2019 calling upon the creditors to file their respective claims on or before 03rd January, 2020. However, the Applicant failed to file any claim within such time.
2. It was further submitted that Applicant did not file any claim within the prescribed timeline of 90 days. The insolvency commencement date is 20th December, 2019 and the maximum period of 90 days from the insolvency commencement date has lapsed long back on 20th March, 2020 and the claim was filed on 10th June, 2022. Thus, the claim of the Applicant is hopelessly time barred under Regulation 12(1) r.w Regulation 12(2) of the CIRP Regulations, 2016.
Decision: NCLT dismissed the application.
Rationale:
1.NCLT held that once the statutory period of CIRP has expired, there is no question of receiving or considering any resolution plan without seeking extension of the CIRP period from this Hon’ble Tribunal.
2. It held that Applicant shall be at liberty to lodge his claim before the Resolution Professional and the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor shall consider the claim of the Applicant on merits after having due regard to the Decree dated 01.02.2019 passed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CS(OS) No. 341/2017 and the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor shall not reject the claim of the Applicant solely on the ground of delay.
Order Copy:
