Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2024) 03 NCLAT CK 3484

Fortune Broking Intermediary Pvt. Ltd. vs Piramal Capital & Housing Finance Ltd.

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi · Decided on 28 March 2024

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Bhushan, Chairperson · Barun Mitra, Member (Technical)
CASE NUMBER
I.A. No. 2118 of 2024 in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No. 413 of 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 289 words

O R D E R

28.03.2024: Heard Shri Abhijeet Sinha, learned senior counsel for the Appellant and learned counsel appearing for the Respondent. This Appeal has been filed against order passed by the Adjudicating Authority dated 04.01.2024 by which I.A. No.3119 of 2023 filed by the Appellant has been rejected.

2.

Learned counsel for the Appellant submits that Appellant was not a creditor of the Corporate Debtor which is essential condition for holding any transaction as preferential transaction under Section 43. It is submitted that the Appellant was not a creditor and his name ought not to have been impleaded in I.A. No.2524 of 2020, which was avoidance application.

3.

Learned counsel for the Respondent does not dispute the submission that Appellant is not a creditor. Learned counsel for the Respondent submits that as per para 5.24 of I.A. No.2524 of 2020, the Appellant was not a creditor of the Corporate Debtor. Proceedings for preferential transaction could have been proceeded only against the creditors and the Appellant being not a creditor of the Corporate Debtor, the Adjudicating Authority ought to have been deleted the name of the Appellant from I.A. No.2524 of 2020. Learned counsel for the Respondent submits that there are other Respondents to the I.A. against whom the application has to be proceeded with and decided.

4.

We make it clear that we are only concerned in present case with regard to Appellant’s name, who is party respondent in I.A. No.2524 of 2020. In view of the submissions of counsel for the parties, as noticed above, we are of the view that I.A. No.3119 of 2023 deserve to be allowed and name of the Appellant be deleted from I.A. No.2524 of 2020. Appeal is disposed of accordingly.