# In the matter of Pramod Kumar Jain vs. Mangesh Vitthal Kekre

> NCLAT judgment dated 2025-02-19. Citation: TCN-2025-NCLAT-00204. This appeal was filed by an ex-director of the Corporate Debtor (Aryan Ispat & Power Pvt.…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 19 Feb 2025
- **Citation:** TCN-2025-NCLAT-00204
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/pramod-kumar-jain-vs-mangesh-vitthal-kekre-c89d3445

## Summary

### Background

This appeal was filed by an ex-director of the Corporate Debtor (Aryan Ispat & Power Pvt. Ltd.) to challenge the order dated 22.03.2024 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), New Delhi. The NCLT admitted an application filed by the Operational Creditor (Agarwal Coal Corporation Private Ltd.) under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, regarding unpaid operational debt. The Operational Creditor claimed an amount of Rs. 6,13,48,161.98, including principal and interest. The Corporate Debtor had already paid Rs. 4,97,22,461.16 towards the principal amount. The dispute centered around the remaining amount of Rs. 1,16,25,700.82, which the Operational Creditor claimed as interest based on a clause in the invoice.

## Facts

The Corporate Debtor, Aryan Ispat & Power Pvt. Ltd., faced an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, filed by the Operational Creditor, Agarwal Coal Corporation Private Ltd., for an amount of Rs. 6,13,48,161.98. This amount included Rs. 4,97,22,461.16 towards the principal and Rs. 1,16,25,700.82 towards interest. The Operational Creditor sent a demand notice to the Corporate Debtor on 05.07.2023, which was replied by the Corporate Debtor on 20.07.2023, contesting the amount demanded. During the pendency of the proceedings, the Corporate Debtor paid Rs. 4,97,22,461.16 and sent an email to the Operational Creditor on 31.01.2024, informing them of the payment and requesting withdrawal of the petition. The ledger account of the

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Operational Creditor can claim interest based solely on a boilerplate provision in the …

**Ratio:** Interest is recoverable only when expressly agreed upon by the parties. In the absence of

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that the invoice provision stating that interest would be charged at

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of Section 5(21) of the IBC restricts claims to those

…

**Application:** In this case, there was no express agreement between the parties regarding the

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Rakesh Kuma…; Naresh Sa…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Pramod Kuma…
- **Respondents:** Aryan Ispat &…; Mangesh Vitthal…

## Timeline

- **2023-07-05 — Demand N…**: The Operational Creditor sent a…
- **2023-07-20 — Reply to Deman…**: The Corporate Debtor replied to the demand…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 5(21) — Definitions](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-5)

---

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/pramod-kumar-jain-vs-mangesh-vitthal-kekre-c89d3445