The mere fact that the Authorised Representative of a creditor in a class have no role in receipt and verification of the claim of the creditors, it cannot be held to mean that creditors in a class have no right with regard to receipt and verification of their claim – Aashray Social Welfare Society & Ors. Vs. Saha Infratech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi

Issues which arise for consideration in this Appeal (i) Whether the application for impleadment filed by the Appellants before the Adjudicating Authority seeking impleadment deserve rejection on the ground that Authorised Representative of Homebuyers who are creditors in class is not representing the creditors in a class before the Adjudicating Authority? (ii) Whether the Appellants have no right to participate in adjudication of the claim of the Financial Creditors whose claim has been rejected by the IRP? (iii) Whether the Adjudicating Authority committed error in rejecting impleadment application filed by the Appellants?
NCLAT held that the clarification appended to Regulation 16A(5) is only clarification to the statutory scheme delineated under the Regulations and the Code that the Authorised Representative has no role in respect of verification of claim of a creditor in class. Can it be said that the Authorised Representative has no role in respect of verification of claims of creditors, therefore, the Financial Creditors in a class themselves have also no right with regard to receipt or verification of claims. The answer is obviously no. The Financial Creditor in class have every right to submit their claim giving proof of verification. The mere fact that the Authorised Representative of a creditor in a class have no role in receipt and verification of the claim of the creditors, it cannot be held to mean that creditors in a class have no right with regard to receipt and verification of their claim. The clarification as contained in Regulation 16A(5) has been read by the Adjudicating Authority to an extent which it never meant. The conclusion recorded by the Adjudicating Authority in paragraph 23 on the basis of erroneous interpretation of Regulation 16A(5) resulted in a wrong conclusion that the creditors in a class have no role in receipt or verification of claims of creditors.

The mere fact that the Authorised Representative of a creditor in a class have no role in receipt and verification of the claim of the creditors, it cannot be held to mean that creditors in a class have no right with regard to receipt and verification of their claim – Aashray Social Welfare Society & Ors. Vs. Saha Infratech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »