The New Delhi Bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal ( NCLAT ) ruled that MoU and ledger extract is insufficient proof for admitting financial debt claim.
The Adjudicating Authority held that CIRP order was passed on 26.09.2019, the Resolution Plan was duly approved by the CoC on 13.08.2021 and the Application has been filed with delay. The Adjudicating Authority held that the RP did not commit any illegality or irregularity in rejecting the Claim of the Appellant.
The Counsel for the Appellant challenging the order submitted that Claims were filed by the Appellant on 09.10.2019, i.e., within the time as published by the RP. It was submitted that along with the Claim Form, the Appellant has also filed respective Memorandum of Understanding ( “MoU” ) as well as Ledger extracts, which prove that amounts were advanced by the Appellant to Corporate Debtor. Ms. Hemanti Kulkarani, Authorised representative with other Directors of D.S. Kulkarni Group were in Jail till they got the bail on 18.11.2022, hence, the relevant documents could not be filed.
The Counsel for the RP, refuting the submissions of the Counsel for the Appellant submitted that claims were filed before the RP on 09.10.2019. It was incumbent upon the Appellant(s) to submit relevant documents as requested by the RP vide his email dated 14.10.2019 and reminder on 13.11.2019. Inspite of the RP demanding the supporting documents from the Appellant(s) to substantiate their claim, no documents were submitted, hence, the RP has no option except to reject the claim.
A Two-Member Bench comprising Justice Ashok Bhushan, Chairperson and Arun Baroka, Member (Technical) observed that “Insofar as documents which have been brought on record by the Appellant before the Adjudicating Authority by filing additional affidavit, suffice it to say that the basic documents relied by the Appellant(s) were MoU and Ledger extract. The MoU, which is a basic document evidencing the transaction does not qualify as a financial debt and the RP has rightly taken the view that the documents filed, i.e. MoU and Ledger statement are insufficient to accept the Claim as financial debt.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
