# In the matter of Usha Holdings LL.C. & Anr. Vs Freancorp Advisors Pvt. Ltd. CA (AT) 44-2018

> NCLAT judgment dated 2018-11-30. Citation: TCN-2018-NCLAT-00041. This case involves an appeal against an order dated December 11, 2017, passed by the…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 30 Nov 2018
- **Citation:** TCN-2018-NCLAT-00041
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/usha-holdings-llc-anr-vs-freancorp-advisors-pvt-ltd-ca-9647a538

## Summary

### Background

This case involves an appeal against an order dated December 11, 2017, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi. The Adjudicating Authority held that a foreign decree cannot be executed in the absence of a certified copy from a superior court of a reciprocating territory. The Adjudicating Authority rejected the application under Section 9 of the I&B Code, stating that the appellants do not fall within the meaning of 'Operational Creditor' and the amount due is not an 'Operational Debt'. The appellants had filed a suit in the US District Court seeking a money judgment for breach of a license agreement.

## Facts

Usha Holdings LL.C. & Anr. filed an appeal against an order by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi, dated December 11, 2017. The Adjudicating Authority ruled that a foreign decree could not be executed without a certified copy from a superior court of a reciprocating territory. The Adjudicating Authority also rejected the appellant's application under Section 9 of the I&B Code, determining that the appellants did not qualify as 'Operational Creditors' and the debt was not an 'Operational Debt'. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was made in 2008 between Gaurav Marya and India JV to operate Francrop License in India. Francorp International, INC. had a license agreement with Francorp Advisors Private Limited

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority has the jurisdiction to decide whether a foreign decree is legal …

**Ratio:** The Adjudicating Authority, not being a Court or Tribunal, and the Insolvency Resolution

…

**Reasoning:** The tribunal relied on the decision in “Binani Industries Limited (Supra)” to support its

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation is that the Adjudicating Authority's role is limited to the

…

**Application:** Since the Adjudicating Authority is not a court or tribunal, it cannot make a

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** S.J. Mukhop…
- **Appellants:** Usha Holdings…
- **Respondents:** Francorp Advisors…; FRANCORP ADVISORS…

## Timeline

- **2017-12-11 — Order by Adjudicating…**: The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Principal Bench, New Delhi,…
- **2008-01-01 — Memorandum of…**: A private and confidential MOU was made between Gaurav Marya and India JV to represent…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 9 — Application for initiation of corporate insolvency…](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-9)

---

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/usha-holdings-llc-anr-vs-freancorp-advisors-pvt-ltd-ca-9647a538