Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Company Law

Partial Loan Disbursement No Bar to Section 7 Proceedings: NCLAT Delhi

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2025 taxguru.in 10180
Case Name
Ammeet Kamal Agarwal Suspended Director of Supreme Transport Organisation Pvt. Ltd. Vs Axis Bank Ltd. & Anr. (NCLAT Delhi)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Courts
NCLAT
Advertisement

Ammeet Kamal Agarwal Suspended Director of Supreme Transport Organisation Pvt. Ltd. Vs Axis Bank Ltd. & Anr. (NCLAT Delhi)

The appeal was filed by Ammeet Kamal Agarwal, the Suspended Director of Supreme Transport Organisation Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor – CD), challenging the Adjudicating Authority’s order dated 08.09.2023, which admitted the application filed by Axis Bank Ltd. (Financial Creditor) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).

Debt and Adjudicating Authority’s Finding

Axis Bank filed the Section 7 application claiming a debt and default of Rs. 16,95,95,909 as on 16.03.2023. The CD opposed the application but the Adjudicating Authority, after hearing the parties, admitted the application, leading to the appeal before the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).

Appellant’s Submissions

The Counsel for the Appellant raised several points:

  • Loan Disbursement: The bank had sanctioned a loan of Rs. 24.90 Crore but only disbursed Rs. 12.50 Crore as on 31.03.2017.
  • Property Documents/Mortgage: The CD had provided documents pertaining to a property by letter dated 29.03.2017, but the Bank later informed that the original documents were not with them. The Appellant noted that Part IV of the Section 7 application mentioned the mortgage of the said property and receipt of the original documents.
  • CD’s Worth: The CD’s worth was submitted to be much higher, and it was argued that the Adjudicating Authority erred in admitting the application.
  • Previous Proceedings: The Appellant was previously directed to deposit the claim amount of Rs. 10,49,26,262, but failed to do so. A proposal under Section 12A of the IBC was also not accepted. The NCLAT had also vacated an interim order on 25.07.2025.
  • Readiness for 12A: The Appellant lastly submitted that they are still ready to offer a higher amount under Section 12A to the Bank.

Respondent’s Submissions and NCLAT’s Analysis

Paid content

Become a Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Sandeep Kanoi
Qualification: CA in Job / Business
Company: Taxguru Consultancy
Location: Mumbai, Maharashtra
Articles Published: 20,910

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.