All ingredients of financial contract as defined under Rule Rule 3(d) of AAA Rules, 2016 can be very well proved even if there is an oral contract- Bankey Bihari Goyal Vs. Ambrane India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. – NCLAT New Delhi

NCLAT holds that there cannot be any dispute with the definition of ‘financial contract’ and the ingredients which are required to the fulfilled for contract to be treated as financial contract but the Rule 3(d) or any of the provisions in the Code does not indicate that a formal written contract is necessary for treating a contract to be a financial contract. It is well settled that contract can be entered both orally as well as by written contract and all ingredients of financial contract can be very well proved even if there is an oral contract.

Related Posts:

If any Public depositor applies showing due of the debt claiming itself as operational creditor and the Resolution Professional or the Tribunal do not accept the claim on the ground that they are not financial creditor, we allow the appellant to raise the question before the Tribunal and if any adverse decision is given by the Tribunal, it will be open to the appellant to raise the issue before NCLAT- Hind Motors India Ltd. Vs. Adjudicating Authority NCLT, Chandigarh – NCLAT New Delhi

IBC-Case Laws-NCLAT
Scroll to Top