Claim for Accrued Interest Beyond NCLT Orders Unsustainable: NCLAT Dismisses IA Seeking ₹15.15 Cr [Read Order]

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, has dismissed the Interlocutory Application (IA) filed in the Company Appeal seeking 15.15 cr accrued interest. It was held that claims for such accrued interest were unsustainable beyond the NCLT orders.

The application sought directions for the release of ₹15.15 crore, claimed as interest accrued on amounts payable to the appellant pursuant to earlier orders of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Allahabad Bench, and NCLAT itself.

The dispute traces back to the ₹750 crore deposit made by Jaiprakash Associates Ltd., the respondent in compliance with Supreme Court directions in Chitra Sharma v. Union of India. The deposit, along with accrued interest, was transferred to NCLT for appropriation between the respondent and Jaypee Infratech Ltd., the appellant.

By order, NCLT determined the appellant's entitlement at ₹542.62 crore, split into ₹265.21 crore and ₹277.41 crore. It also directed proportionate interest to the appellant, a finding later challenged before NCLAT.

Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here

The NCLAT passed an interim order recording the respondent's statement of “no objection” to release ₹265.21 crore to the appellant Monitoring Committee. The amount was eventually disbursed on 05.08.2023. Subsequently, in its final judgment, NCLAT held that the ₹750 crore deposit and all accrued interest were assets of the respondent.

It affirmed appellant's entitlement to the principal sums determined by NCLT but set aside the direction granting proportionate interest.

In IA, the appellant argued that it was entitled to interest accrued on the sums between the dates of the Tribunal’s orders and the actual disbursement dates. Specifically, it claimed ₹5.78 crore on ₹265.21 crore (07.03.2023 to 05.08.2023) and ₹9.37 crore on ₹277.41 crore (07.03.2023 to 20.10.2023), totalling ₹15.15 crore.

Appellant contended that the entitlement arose from the interim and final orders themselves, and that the interest earned on fixed deposits during the intervening period was its property.

Respondents opposed the claim, submitting that the entire deposit and accrued interest belonged to the respondent, as already settled by NCLAT’s final judgment.

Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here

They argued that appellant had received its full entitlement of principal sums, and no order had ever directed payment of interest to appellant. The Registry of NCLT also clarified that all amounts had been released as per entitlement, with no residual sums left.

After hearing both sides, the bench comprising Ashok Bhushan (Chairperson) and Barun Mitra (Technical Member) rejected the appellant's claim. The Tribunal noted that neither the interim order of nor the final judgment fixed any time limit for release or directed payment of interest in case of delay.

It emphasised that its final judgment had conclusively held the ₹750 crore deposit and accrued interest to be assets of the respondent, and had set aside NCLT’s direction granting proportionate interest to the appellant. Consequently, the appellant's claim for ₹15.15 crore was unsustainable.

The Tribunal observed that the appellant had already received the entire principal entitlement determined by NCLT and NCLAT, and no further directions were warranted. IA was accordingly dismissed, with no order as to costs.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates