# In the matter of Paresh Govindbhai Hirpara & Anr. vs. Prabhat Jain, RP of Vikas Procon Pvt. Ltd.

> NCLAT judgment dated 2024-09-09. Citation: TCN-2024-NCLAT-00206. This case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority, which…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 9 Sept 2024
- **Citation:** TCN-2024-NCLAT-00206
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/paresh-govindbhai-hirpara-anr-vs-prabhat-jain-rp-of-vikas-procon-pvt-ltd-dc04d940

## Summary

### Background

This case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Adjudicating Authority, which rejected I.A. No. 3991 of 2023 filed by the Appellant for accepting their claim in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of the Corporate Debtor. The CIRP commenced on 19.04.2023. The Appellant claims that Rs. 40 lakhs was given to the Corporate Debtor, reflected in a bank transaction with HDFC Bank. Initially, a claim form was filed in Form 'C' claiming Rs. 40 lakhs as financial debt with interest. The Resolution Professional (RP) acknowledged the receipt of the claim form.

## Facts

The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against the Corporate Debtor commenced on 2023-04-19. The Appellant, Paresh Govindbhai Hirpara, claims that Rs. 40 lakhs was given to the Corporate Debtor, as reflected in a bank transaction with HDFC Bank. Initially, the Appellant filed a claim in Form 'C' for Rs. 40 lakhs as a financial debt with interest. The Resolution Professional (RP) acknowledged receipt of this claim. Later, the Appellant filed a claim in Form CA, supported by an MoU indicating the allotment of Shop No. G-34. The RP rejected the claim, citing inconsistencies between the initial claim as a financial debt and the subsequent claim as an allottee. The Adjudicating Authority upheld the RP's decision. The Appellant then filed an appeal. The RP did

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in rejecting the Appellant's claim in the CIRP of the …

**Ratio:** The format of the claim is not decisive, and the substance of the claim should be

…

**Reasoning:** The court found that the RP did not deny the receipt of Rs. 40 lakhs and that the claim

…

**Interpretation:** The court interpreted that the Adjudicating Authority should have considered

…

**Application:** The court applied this principle to the facts of the case, finding that the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Ashok Bh…; Barun M…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Paresh Govindbhai…
- **Respondents:** Vikas Procon Pvt.…; Prabhat…
- **Advocates:** Palash S. S…; Harshal S…; +3 more

## Timeline

- **2023-04-19 — CIRP Commen…**: The Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process…
- **2023-06-09 — Claim Filed i…**: The Appellant filed its…

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/paresh-govindbhai-hirpara-anr-vs-prabhat-jain-rp-of-vikas-procon-pvt-ltd-dc04d940