Tribunals and CommissionsFull Bench(2022) 07 NCLAT CK 0062

Piramal Capital & Housing Finance Limited (Formerly known as DHFL) vs Nayati Healthcare & Research NCR Pvt. Ltd. & Anr

National Company Law Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 28 July 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Ashok Bhushan, Chairperson · M. Satyanarayana Murthy, Member (J) · Barun Mitra, Member (T)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
I.A. No. 2387 Of 2022 in Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 540 Of 2022

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

6 paragraphs · 249 words
1.

Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.

2.

This Appeal has been filed against the order dated 19.04.2022 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Bench-IV, New Delhi, by which Section 7 Application filed by the Appellant was rejected.

3.

In this Appeal by an order dated 20.07.2022, this Tribunal in I.A 2136 of 2022 has issued direction for disbursement of the amount which was deposited in the separate account for sale of the assets by the Yes Bank with whom the assets are mortgaged.

4.

Now, an I.A 2387 of 2022 has been jointly filed by the Financial Creditor as well as the Corporate Debtor where it is stated that both the parties have now settled their issues and in lieu of payment of Rs. 30 Crores to the Financial Creditor, a decision has been taken to issue No-Dues Certificate/Discharge Letter to Corporate Debtor by the Financial Creditor. The said fact has been specifically stated in paragraph 7(vii) and terms has already been recorded in paragraph 7 (vii) which reads as under:-

“(vii) The Appellant/ Applicant No.1 has further agreed to issue a No-Dues Certificate/ Discharge Letter to Respondent No.1/ Applicant No.2 after receiving an amount of Rs.30,00,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Crores Only) being paid over to the Appellant/ Applicant No.1 from the total sale proceeds of the Gurgaon Property.”

5.

In view of the above fact, we see no reason to continue this Appeal any further. The Appeal has become infructuous. The Appeal is disposed of.