Supreme Court of India
NTPC LTD. (SIMHADRI PROJECT) versus RAJIV CHAKRABORTY
- Decided
- 16 November 2020
- Judges listed
- A.M. KHANWILKAR, BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI, HRISHIKESH ROY
- Disposal
- Disposed off
Citations
- Official
- [2020] 13 S.C.R. 1090 · 2020 INSC 642
Cited by
We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.
Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.
The Court's text
Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Paragraph numbering in our copy is uncertain (unnumbered_in_numbered_era). Link to paragraph N with #para-N.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
p. 1091, margin A
The limited issue in this appeal is about the claim of the appellant not being reflected under the heading ‘Claims of Operational Creditors’ in the Information Memorandum prepared by the Resolution Professional.
p. 1091, margin A
The Adjudicating Authority and the Appellate Tribunal have taken a view that the appellant’s claim is already noted in Information Memorandum under the title, ‘List of Other Creditor Claims (excluding Related Party Claims and Employees and Workmen Claims) as on 17th July, 2019’. No grievance has been made by the appellant that the figure noted therein is incorrect.
p. 1091, margin B
According to the appellant, the claim amount should have been reflected under the heading ‘Claims of Operational Creditors’. We do not agree with this submission.
p. 1091, margin C
It is not in dispute that the claim of the appellant is still pending adjudication before the Arbitrator and it has been, therefore, rightly described in the memorandum as other creditor claims (claims under adjudication).
p. 1091, margin D
The purpose of memorandum is only to provide relevant information regarding the financial position of the company in question. It is not about deciding the claim or disregarding the claim amount, if it exists in law. The Resolution Professional has no authority/power to accept or disallow the claims. The appellant’s claim would not get extinguished unless it is adjudicated upon by a competent forum or by operation of law.
p. 1091, margin E
Suffice it to observe that the claim of the appellant has been taken note of in the information memorandum and does not get extinguished as such; but it will be subject to adjudication by the Arbitrator. Since it is part of the memorandum, it is obvious that the resolution applicant would take the same into account while submitting his proposal, due notice whereof will be taken by the committee of creditors as well, and dealt with appropriately in the final resolution plan.
p. 1091, margin F
In the event, the appellant has any grievance about the nature or manner of provision made in the final resolution plan qua its claim; and if aggrieved with the final resolution plan, may take recourse to appropriate remedy as per law.
pp. 1091–1092, margin G
All contentions available to the appellant in that regard are left open while once again making it clear that the claim of the appellant has not been treated as extinguished.
p. 1092, margin A
In view of the above, the civil appeal is disposed of.
p. 1092, margin B
As the appeal is disposed of, the interim order passed earlier stands vacated.
p. 1092, margin B
As a result of which, we expect the concerned authorities to expedite the process of resolution.
p. 1092, margin B
Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
p. 1092, margin C