AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ch. Mohd. Sharief Tariq, J
Under consideration are MA/259/2019 and MA/260/2019 filed in TCP/413/(IB)CB/2017, which are pertaining to the same subject matter, and are proceeded to be dealt with by a common order.
These Applications have been filed by Mr. K.I. Ramesh against M/s. Titanium Tantalum Products Limited, represented by the Liquidator viz., Mr. Vasudevan.
In MA/260/2019, it has been submitted by the Applicant that the Liquidator has rejected the claim of the Applicant for an amount of Rs. 16,98,620/- along with simple interest @ 8% for the period of seven months with effect from September 2011 to March 2012, which was due on account of the consultancy charges and was to be paid to him by the Company under Liquidation. The reason of rejection as shown by the Liquidator is that the amount claimed is barred by limitation, as the same is due more than three years.
The Applicant has submitted that the Financial Statement for the year ending 31.03.2017 under Note No. 5 (c) shows other payables as Rs. 64,803,273/-, which includes his claim also, and the same constitues the acknowledgment of debt and the claim filed before the Liquidator on 04.07.2018 is within the period of limitation.
The Applicant has stated in MA/259/2019 that the Applicant during the period of August 2018 to December 2018 had been affected by jaundice and its relapse and added that the age related ailments have virtually immobilized him up to the 2nd week of February 2019 and immediately on recovery from the ill-health, the Applicant approached the Counsel, who advised him to make an Application to this Tribunal for reviewing the unjust and unlawful decision of the Respondent/Liquidator and this appeal is filed after lapse of 175 days and prayed to condone the delay on the said ground(s).
In the reply, the Liquidator for the Company has stated that the Books of the Corporate Debtor show an amount of Rs. 10,91,970/- as due and payable to the Applicant as reflected from the ASP accounting package available with the Corporate Debtor. However, the last demand made by the Applicant was on 03.09.2013, as per the e-mail communication sent by him to the Corporate Debtor. The Liquidator has submitted that the claim filed before him on 04.07.2018 is time barred and there does not arise any question for payment of interest as claimed by the Applicant. Besides this, it has been submitted by the Liquidator that the present appeal is filed along with the Application for condonation after the lapse of 175 days, which is liable to be dismissed as the time period stipulated under the provisions of Section 42 of the I&B Code, 2016 for filing an appeal is only 14 days from the date of receiving the communication pertaining to rejection of the claim.
It has further been submitted that since the power supply of the entire premises of the Corporate Debtor has not been available from October 2018, no detail is available on the invoices raised. In other words, the Liquidator is not in a position to provide any information as to the pending bills payabale as per the Books of the Company, on account of non-payment of consultancy fee charges, as claimed by the Applicant and prayed to dismiss the Appeal, being time barred.
During the course of hearing, the Liquidator has submitted that there are no assets left with the Company and only scraps are available of a few lakhs but the liability is in crore(s) and even if the claim of the Applicant is admitted, there is nothing to pay to him, as the Liquidator is not even able to meet out the liquidation cost. The assets are already given as collaterals to the secured Financial Creditors, who have decided to opt out of the liquidation process.
The provisions of Section 42 of the IBC, 2016, stipulate that a Creditor may appeal to the Adjudicating Authority against the decision of the Liquidator either accepting or rejecting the claim within 14 days of receipt of the decision. The time period fixed appears to be mandatory for filing the appeal, and therefore the delay of 175 days cannot be condoned. Even otherwise, the cause shown in filing the appeal with the delay of 175 days does not appear to be a sufficient for seeking condonation of delay, as no medical certificate of any ailment is placed on record. The reasons given are general in nature and not supported with any documentary evidence. Therefore, no case is made out for condonation of delay of 175 days in filing the appeal under the Provisions of Section 42 of the I&B Code, 2016.
It appears from the case file that with effect from 03.09.2013 onwards, the Applicant slept over the claim and never initiated any legal action for recovery of the same from the Company. The Applicant has filed the claim before the Liquidator only on 04.07.2018, which suffers from the delay and laches. The Applicant moved to file the appeal against the rejection of his claim after the lapse of 175 days, which is an inordinate delay and no sufficient cause is shown.
In the circumstances, MA/260/2019 and MA/259/2019 filed in TCP/413/(IB)CB/2017 for condonation of delay and against the rejection of claim stand dismissed.
The order is pronounced in the Open Court.