AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per: B. S.V. PRAKASH KUMAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
It is an application filed by the Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited (Applicant) assailing the rejection of the claim of this Applicant by the Liquidator.
On perusal of this application, it appears that initially the debtor owed to pay ₹42,08,86,784 as on 31.03.2009 to Bank of India and Indian Overseas Bank towards the loans availed by it, thereafter as Indian Overseas Bank assigned its debt to the applicant on 19.03.2008 and Bank of India assigned its debt to the applicant on 31.03.2008, this applicant, in turn, on 29.07.2009 entered into Agreement of Assignment with an investor namely M/s. Poddar Projects Limited (Poddar) for takeover of this debt by “Poddar” on consideration.
Since full payment of consideration did not come from this investor, this Applicant had approached the Hon’ble DRT-I on 11.04.2013 for substitution of this Applicant for Bank of India and Indian Overseas Bank in OA243/2007 pending before it, wherein the Hon’ble DRT-I, Chennai dismissed the substitution sought by this Applicant holding that this Applicant has no locus to make its claim against this Corporate Debtor for it has already assigned the debt to the investor M/s. Poddar Projects Limited. Assailing the order of DRT-I, when this Applicant had approached the Hon’ble DRAT, Chennai for setting aside of the order passed by the DRT-I, DRAT dismissed the appeal of the Applicant on 06.01.2017.
Having failed before the DRT as well as the DRAT, this Applicant approached the Hon’ble High Court of Madras by filing Writ Petition 5121 of 2017 assailing the orders passed by the DRT and DRAT stating that since the investor (M/s. Poddar Projects Limited) failed to perform its obligations, the applicant canvassed before the Honorable High Court that its status in respect to the debt assigned by the Banks shall be restored, so that it could proceed against the Corporate Debtor. On being examined, the Honorable High Court on 09.07.2018 dismissed the Writ Petition 5121 of 2017 making observation in Para 19, which are follows:
“The fifty respondents also submitted that the claim of the petitioner company that the Agreement of Assignment does not in any way preclude the rights of the petitioner as secured creditor cannot be accepted. The petitioner cannot have two simultaneous recoveries, one from M/s. PPL and another, as the secured creditor. The fifth respondent further submitted that the petitioner company had to work out the remedy only in terms of the agreement with M/s. PPL and they cannot claim any right under the earlier agreement by revoking the subsequent agreement.
This Applicant is not being satiated with the orders passed by DRT, DRAT and High Court of Madras, this Applicant approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India assailing the order passed in the above Writ Petition, but that was also dismissed. Till date this applicant has not initiated proceedings against the M/s. Poddar Projects Limited for nullification of the Agreement of Assignment executed in favor of the M/s. Poddar Projects Limited. After having failed at all fronts, this Applicant instead of proceeding against M/s. Poddar Projects Limited as held by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in Para 19 of the judgment aforementioned, this Applicant has again tried its luck before the Liquidator claiming this debt against the Corporate Debtor, as if it is entitled to make a claim basing on the earlier Assignment Agreements dated 19.03.2008 and 31.03.2008.
Looking at the Claim Petition and the orders of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras, the Liquidator rejected the Applicant’s claim basing on the order passed by the Hon’ble Court of Madras.
On examining various orders passed by various Fora and Assignment Agreements executed in favor of M/s. Poddar Projects Limited, I am of the view that the Liquidator has rightly rejected the claim of this Applicant, because the reason for rejection of the claim is since the Hon’ble DRT, Hon’ble DRAT, Hon’ble High Court of Madras and Hon’ble Supreme Court of India held that this Applicant will not have any locus to proceed against the Corporate Debtor for the right of assignment conferred upon by this Applicant by the two banks aforementioned has already been transferred to M/s. Poddar Projects Limited, therefore no right has remained vested with this Applicant to proceed any further against this Corporate Debtor save and except proceeding against the M/s. Poddar Projects Limited to whom this debt was further assigned.
In view of the reasons aforementioned, this MA/298/2019 is hereby dismissed.