Arun Kapoor (Resolution Professional of Monarch Brookefields LLP) Vs Shankar W Sawant & Anr. (NCLAT Delhi)
Introduction: The case of “Arun Kapoor Vs Shankar W Sawant & Anr.” at NCLAT Delhi revolves around a dispute involving payments made by allottees to ex-directors that were not reflected in the records of the Corporate Debtor (CD). The Resolution Professional (RP) under Liquidation is directed to admit these claims, with the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) dismissing the appeal against this decision.
Analysis: The case emphasizes the complexity and importance of transparency in financial transactions, particularly in real estate deals. Key highlights include:
1. Payments to Ex-Directors: The allottees made payments to the ex-directors, raising questions about the validity and legality of these payments, which were not reflected in the records of the CD.
2. The Role of the Resolution Professional: The RP objected to the order of accepting the claim for the specified amount, raising the issue of already approved plans and the current stage of acceptance of the claim.
3. Adjudicating Authority’s Decision: NCLAT meticulously reviewed the evidence, including financial statements, and found no reason to doubt the original findings. The acceptance of three specific payments and the rejection of an amount claimed by RTGS were key factors.
4. Precedents and Legal Framework: The judgment referred to existing laws and rulings, reiterating that disbursement is a precondition for allotment.
Conclusion: The judgment in “Arun Kapoor Vs Shankar W Sawant & Anr.” highlights the intricate legal landscape governing financial transactions in the real estate sector and the significance of meticulous record-keeping. The case underscores the importance of transparency and legal adherence in financial dealings and reaffirms the role of NCLAT in upholding these principles. The dismissal of the appeal emphasizes the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that the rules are applied consistently and fairly, taking into consideration the specific facts and evidence presented in each case.
FULL TEXT OF THE NCLAT JUDGMENT/ORDER
This appeal has been filed against the order dated 03.03.2023 by which order Adjudicating Authority has allowed the Company Appeal No. 9 of 2022 directing the Resolution Professional ‘Monarch Brookefields LLP’ under Liquidation to accept and admit the claim of the applicants.
2. Resolution Professional aggrieved by the said order has come up in this appeal. Learned Counsel for the Resolution Professional submits that plan has already been approved by the CoC and under consideration before the Adjudicating Authority.
3.At this stage acceptance of the claim of the respondent could not be justified. It is further submitted that respondents have made payment of only Rs. 11,50,000/- by direction has been issued to accept the claim of Rs. 35,12,000/-.
4. We have considered submissions of the appellant and perused the records.
5. In Paragraph 2 of the order Adjudicating Authority has held:
“The Applicants submit that they decided to purchase a Flat in a new project being developed by the Corporate Debtor to be constructed at Kalamboli in Navi Mumbai. On payment of a token amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only), the Corporate Debtor issued an Allotment Letter vide which Flat No. 402, “Florida” Building (hereinafter referred to as “said Flat” for the sake of brevity) was allotted to the Applicants. Subsequently, the Applicants made a series of payments to the Corporate Debtor on demand and the same is tabulated hereinbelow:
