AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
09.07.2025: None appears on behalf of the Respondent. Even they have not filed reply to the appeal and vide order dated 10.02.2025, their right to file reply was closed. Today also none has appeared on behalf of the Respondent, hence, we proceed to hear this appeal.
This appeal is against an impugned order dated 12.01.2023 whereby a petition filed under Section 7 of the IBC, 2016 by the Appellant herein before the Ld. NCLT, Kolkata Bench was dismissed.
It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the Appellant the reasoning given in paragraph 11 of the impugned order is factually incorrect. The Ld. NCLT though was of the view that 18 crores recovered from the sale of the assets as mentioned in the paragraph 9 of the impugned order were credited to the loan account of the CD as maintained by the UCO Bank but whereas only Rs. 1.85 crores had come to the appellant bank from the sale proceeds of two such properties as mentioned above also further the Ld. NCLT relied upon a letter dated 12.11.2020 as mentioned in paragraph 9 of its order to take such a view.
Ld. Counsel for the appellant has shown us correspondences between the parties. First a letter dated 03.11.2020 written by UCO Bank to CFM Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. wherein the UCO Bank had only accorded permission to CFM Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. to sell the two properties mentioned therein and to make payment of an amount of Rs.1.85 crores on account. The said letter is as under:
Further, a letter dated 09.11.2020 was again sent by UCO Bank to M/s CFM Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. wherein they have given no objection certificate qua the sale of the two assets mentioned therein. The said letter is also as under:
Now at such time even after adjusting Rs. 1.85 crores the amount due against the Corporate Debtor was Rs. 5.66 crores, as shown depicted in the statement of account, annexed along with appeal at pages no. 299 & 300.
The Ld. Counsel for the Appellant has also referred to the OTS proposal dated 15.12.2021 given by the CD wherein the appellant had requested the appellant bank to accept an amount of Rs. 2 crores. This was after the payment of Rs. 1.85 crores was credited on sale of the two properties aforementioned. The Ld. Counsel for the appellant has also referred to a letter dated 28.01.2022, written by the UCO Bank to the Corporate Debtor, in response to its OTS proposal dated 15.12.2021 wherein the appellant has actually demanded an amount of Rs. 5.66 crores plus accrued interest from the date of NPA till date. The letter dated 28.01.2022 of UCO Bank is as under:-
Thus, it was the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the Appellant that the findings given in the paragraph 11 of the impugned order are incorrect and it was so given as the letters dated 15.12.2021; 28.01.2022 were inadvertently never filed before the Ld. NCLT. A bare perusal of such documents would reveal the amount of Rs. 1.85 crores was never a full and final settlement but a part adjustment of dues as the major portion of sale consideration went to SBI viz. the another Financial Creditor.
Thus in the circumstances and in view of the documents shown to us it would be appropriate if we set aside the impugned order and allow the appellant to file all relevant documents before the Ld. NCLT so that an overall view be taken by the Ld. NCLT in this regard.
Considering the above submissions, we set aside the impugned order dt. 12.01.2023 and restore C.P. (IB) No. 1929/KB/2019. The parties are directed to appear before the Ld. NCLT on 30.07.2025 for further proceedings.
The appeal stands disposed of. Pending applications, if any, are closed.