This is an appeal preferred by Mr. Sunil Kumar Aggarwal, representing home buyers of M/s. Granite Gate Properties Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor), against an order dated June 10, 2019, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi. The core issue revolves around the claim filed by New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) before the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and whether NOIDA should be considered a 'Financial Creditor'.
Mr. Sunil Kumar Aggarwal, representing home buyers of M/s. Granite Gate Properties Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal against an order by the Adjudicating Authority. The New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) filed a claim before the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The IRP initially refused to consider NOIDA's claim. The Adjudicating Authority directed the IRP to examine NOIDA's claim. NOIDA argues it should be considered a 'Financial Creditor' under Section 5(8)(d) of the Code, citing that its lease agreement constitutes a finance of capital lease under Indian Accounting Standards. The Appellant argues that NOIDA has already been considered a 'Financial Creditor'. The Adjudicating Authority has not made a final decision on the matter.
Sign in to view the parties.
Order passed by the Adjudicating Authority…
Mr. Sunil Kumar Aggarwal preferred an appeal…
This is an appeal preferred by Mr. Sunil Kumar Aggarwal, representing home buyers of M/s. Granite Gate Properties Pvt. Ltd. (Corporate Debtor), against an order dated June 10, 2019, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi. The core issue revolves around the claim filed by New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) before the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and whether NOIDA should be considered a 'Financial Creditor'.
Mr. Sunil Kumar Aggarwal, representing home buyers of M/s. Granite Gate Properties Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal against an order by the Adjudicating Authority. The New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA) filed a claim before the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). The IRP initially refused to consider NOIDA's claim. The Adjudicating Authority directed the IRP to examine NOIDA's claim. NOIDA argues it should be considered a 'Financial Creditor' under Section 5(8)(d) of the Code, citing that its lease agreement constitutes a finance of capital lease under Indian Accounting Standards. The Appellant argues that NOIDA has already been considered a 'Financial Creditor'. The Adjudicating Authority has not made a final decision on the matter.
Order passed by the Adjudicating Authority…
Mr. Sunil Kumar Aggarwal preferred an appeal…