18/01/2021

Unpaid instalment as per the settlement agreement cannot be treated as operational debt as per section 5(21) of Code, The failure or breach of settlement agreement cannot be a ground to trigger CIRP against Corporate Debtor – M/s Omega Elevators Vs. Prajay Properties Private Limited – NCLT Hyderabad Bench

NCLT held that default in payment of instalments according to Agreement to Pay in question entered into between the parties does not come within the definition of operational debt. Besides, there was pre-existing dispute on the issue of `maintenance of lifts’ between the parties as seen from the e­mail communications of the users of elevators. Simultaneously, parallel proceedings have been initiated for dishonour of cheques under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. All the above prove that this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain this petition under section 9 of the I86B Code, 2016. We are, therefore, not inclined to admit the petition. In view of the above the petition is hereby rejected.(p7-10)

Unpaid instalment as per the settlement agreement cannot be treated as operational debt as per section 5(21) of Code, The failure or breach of settlement agreement cannot be a ground to trigger CIRP against Corporate Debtor – M/s Omega Elevators Vs. Prajay Properties Private Limited – NCLT Hyderabad Bench Read Post »

Forfeiture of Earnest Money Deposit from the E-Auction Applicant/Bidder – Saboo Tor Private Limited Vs. Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Liquidator Case Cold Roll Forming Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi

In the present case, the material on record evidences that reminder e-mails dated 01.04.2020, 02.04.2020, 23.04.2020, 15.05.2020 and 18.05.2020 were issued by the Liquidator to the Appellant herein requesting for payment of the balance amount of the 25% of the consideration but the Appellant neither replied to the e-mails nor made any payment adhering to the terms and conditions. It can be safely construed that the Appellant, by his own conduct, precluded the coming into existence of the concluded ‘Sale’ and cannot now be given an advantage or benefit of his own wrong doing by not allowing forfeiture.(p14)

Forfeiture of Earnest Money Deposit from the E-Auction Applicant/Bidder – Saboo Tor Private Limited Vs. Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Liquidator Case Cold Roll Forming Ltd. – NCLAT New Delhi Read Post »

Resolution Applicant cannot be allowed to face hydra head suddenly popping up after the approval of the Resolution Plan in relation to the Corporate Debtor of liabilities – S Ramuthai Vs. P dot G Constructions – NCLT Chennai Bench

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to

Resolution Applicant cannot be allowed to face hydra head suddenly popping up after the approval of the Resolution Plan in relation to the Corporate Debtor of liabilities – S Ramuthai Vs. P dot G Constructions – NCLT Chennai Bench Read Post »

Scroll to Top