The appeal was filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority rejecting Section 7 petition filed by the Appellant for initiation of CIRP. The appellant's case is that on his personal guarantee the Creditor's investors gave some funds to the Corporate Debtor. Arbitration proceedings were initiated based on the guarantee, and an award dated 2013-11-11 was issued in favor of the Appellant, which is already under execution. The Adjudicating Authority refused to admit the Section 7 application.
Shaikh Mohammed Tariq, the Appellant, filed an appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's decision to reject a Section 7 application for initiating CIRP against Aegis Forging Ltd., the Corporate Debtor. The Appellant's claim is based on a personal guarantee provided to Creditor's investors who gave funds to the Corporate Debtor. Arbitration proceedings were initiated based on this guarantee, resulting in an award dated 2013-11-11 in favor of the Appellant, which is currently under execution. The Adjudicating Authority refused to admit the Section 7 application, leading to the current appeal. The Appellant contends that the guarantee falls under Section 5(8)(i) of the Code, classifying it as a financial debt. The existence of an arbitral award already under execution
…Sign in to view the parties.
An arbitral award was…
Learned Counsel…
The appeal was filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority rejecting Section 7 petition filed by the Appellant for initiation of CIRP. The appellant's case is that on his personal guarantee the Creditor's investors gave some funds to the Corporate Debtor. Arbitration proceedings were initiated based on the guarantee, and an award dated 2013-11-11 was issued in favor of the Appellant, which is already under execution. The Adjudicating Authority refused to admit the Section 7 application.
Shaikh Mohammed Tariq, the Appellant, filed an appeal against the Adjudicating Authority's decision to reject a Section 7 application for initiating CIRP against Aegis Forging Ltd., the Corporate Debtor. The Appellant's claim is based on a personal guarantee provided to Creditor's investors who gave funds to the Corporate Debtor. Arbitration proceedings were initiated based on this guarantee, resulting in an award dated 2013-11-11 in favor of the Appellant, which is currently under execution. The Adjudicating Authority refused to admit the Section 7 application, leading to the current appeal. The Appellant contends that the guarantee falls under Section 5(8)(i) of the Code, classifying it as a financial debt. The existence of an arbitral award already under execution
…An arbitral award was…
Learned Counsel…