Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2020 (10) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 1302 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Financial Creditors - existence of debt and dispute or not - default of payment of amount on the basis of Settlement Agreement - whether the amount, which the petitioner claimed as a defaulted amount comes under the definition of Financial Debt or not? - HELD THAT:- Mere plain reading of the provisions shows that the debt means a liability or obligation in respect of a claim, which is due from any person and includes a financial debt and operational debt and when we shall read the definition of debt and financial debt together then we may say that of course, the debt includes the Financial Debt and Operational Debt but all the debts are not Financial Debt or Operational Debt, only debt defined under Section 5(8) of the IBC, comes under the definition of Financial Debt and debt defined under Section 5(21) of the IBC comes under the definition of Operational Debt. The case of the Petitioner is based upon the Settlement Agreement and, the Petitioner herself admits this fact that the Petitioner is no longer a unit buyer as the unit stands withdrawn by issuance of the refund cheques, therefore, in the light of that fact, which the Petitioner has mentioned in her application, when we shall consider the definition of Financial Debt as defined under Section 5 (8) of the IBC, 2016 then it can be said that any amount raised from the Allottee under a Real Estate Project shall be deemed to be an amount having the commercial affect of a borrowing. Since the Applicant herself admits this fact that she is no longer Allottee, therefore, the amount, which the Applicant has invested does not come under the definition of Section 5 (8)(f) of the IBC, 2016, and if the amount invested by the Petitioner does not come under the definition of Financial Debt then the Petitioner cannot be treated as a Financial Creditor under Section 5 (7) of IBC, 2016. Whether the applicant claims herself a Financial Creditor under Section 5(8) on the basis of a Settlement Agreement or not? - HELD THAT:- It is the settled principle of law that the NCLT is not a recovery court rather when a default of financial debt or operational debt occurred, in that case, the financial creditor or the operational creditor may file an application for initiating the CIRP under Section 7 or Section 9 of the IBC respectively and in the light of the facts, the case in hand is considered, it is concluded that the settlement agreement on the basis of which, the present application is filed by the applicant does not comes under the definition of Financial Debt. The Applicant is not the Financial Creditor under Section 5 (7) of the IBC, 2016 and the amount, which the applicant has invested is not a Financial Debt under Section 5(8) of the IBC, 2016 and so far the default of payment of amount on the basis of Settlement Agreement is concerned, the default also does not come under the definition of Financial Debt. Application dismissed.
|