There is no second opinion of an important fact that distinction between Deposits and Loans may not be a significant factor for interpreting the word Deposit – Mr. Mohanlal Dhakad Vs. BNG Global India Limited – NCLAT New Delhi

To determine the plea of occurrence of default is the debt which must be due and become payable. An existence of debt and default are to be met for admission of an Application under section 7 of the Code. A Debt is/was recoverable from the Corporate Debtor. It is relevant to point out that a deposit is more than a loan of money. Significantly, deposit is given at the instance of an individual who is making a deposit. Under the Companies Act, 2013, the powers of Tribunal are of wide amplitude. Rule 17 of Companies (Acceptance of Deposits) Rules, 2014 provides that a Company shall be liable to pay penal interest at 18% p.a. to the depositor, if there is any failure to repay Deposits within due date. In fact, the penal interest is payable when the payment was overdue after maturity of the deposits.(p29-30)

At the stage of Admission, the Adjudicating Authority is to be satisfied that a Default had occurred and the Corporate Debtor is entitled to point out that the Default had not occurred. No other person has the right to be heard at the state of Admission. There is no second opinion of an important fact that distinction between Deposits and Loans may not be a significant factor for interpreting the word, Deposit. One cannot ignore a candid fact that maturity of claim, default of claim or invocation of guarantee has no nexus in regard to the filing of claim before the Interim Resolution Professional under section 18(1)(b) of the Code and the Resolution Professional under section 25(2)(e) of the Code.(p31-32)

There is no second opinion of an important fact that distinction between Deposits and Loans may not be a significant factor for interpreting the word Deposit – Mr. Mohanlal Dhakad Vs. BNG Global India Limited – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »