Ankur Kumar Vs Sustainable Agro-Commercial Financial Ltd. (NCLAT Delhi)
NCLAT Delhi held that invocation of guarantee subsequent to initiation of CIRP cannot be the base for any claim to be admitted in the CIRP. Accordingly, appeal allowed and order passed by adjudicating authority set aside.
Facts- The Corporate Debtor- Gangakhed Sugar & Energy Ltd. entered into Deed of Guarantee dated 13.11.2014 with the Respondent- Sustainable Agro-Commercial Financial Ltd. guaranting the loan extended by the Commercial Financial Limited to the borrower. The Commercial Financial Limited has extended different amount of term loan to the farmers. The Corporate Guarantee by the Corporate Debtor was for the amount of Rs.2 Crore.
On an application filed by the UCO Bank, CIRP process against the Corporate Debtor commenced by order dated 10.10.2019. The Appellant was appointed as an IRP. The Respondent- Sustainable Agro-Commercial Financial Ltd. issued a letter dated 18.09.2020 to the Chief Executive Director of the Corporate Debtor invoking the corporate guarantee dated 13.11.2014.
In the CIRP of the Corporate Debtor, the CoC approved the Resolution Plan on 13.09.2021. Commercial Financial Ltd. submitted a claim in Form C dated 13.10.2021 to the Resolution Professional claiming an amount of Rs.1,14,57,536/- for non-payment of agreed repayment of loan by the corporate debtor in pursuance of the corporate guarantee dated 13.11.2014. The said letter was replied by Appellant on 12.11.2021 informing that the claim is submitted under Regulation 17 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Voluntary Liquidation Process) Regulations, 2017 which is not valid.
