The case involves an application filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, by financial creditors against M/s. AMR Infrastructures Limited, the corporate debtor, seeking to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The applicants, claiming to be financial creditors, entered into agreements/Memorandum of Understanding with the respondent for purchasing units in projects developed by the corporate debtor. The respondent started paying 'Committed Returns' as per the MOU but stopped, leading to the application. The application was initially dismissed but later set aside by the NCLAT, which held that those with a commitment to pay 'assured return' are covered by the expression 'financial creditor'. The matter was remitted back to
…Nikhil Mehta & Sons (HUF) & Ors. filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against M/s. AMR Infrastructures Limited. The applicants claimed to be financial creditors based on agreements/Memorandum of Understanding for purchasing units in projects developed by AMR Infrastructures. According to the agreements, the applicants were to pay a substantial portion of the sale consideration upfront, and AMR Infrastructures was to pay a particular amount each month as 'Committed Returns/Assured Returns' until physical possession of the units. AMR Infrastructures stopped paying these returns from April 2014 for some applicants and January 2014 for others. The application was initially dismissed on the grounds that the applicants were
…Sign in to view the parties.
The present app…
The applicati…
The case involves an application filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, by financial creditors against M/s. AMR Infrastructures Limited, the corporate debtor, seeking to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The applicants, claiming to be financial creditors, entered into agreements/Memorandum of Understanding with the respondent for purchasing units in projects developed by the corporate debtor. The respondent started paying 'Committed Returns' as per the MOU but stopped, leading to the application. The application was initially dismissed but later set aside by the NCLAT, which held that those with a commitment to pay 'assured return' are covered by the expression 'financial creditor'. The matter was remitted back to
…Nikhil Mehta & Sons (HUF) & Ors. filed an application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 against M/s. AMR Infrastructures Limited. The applicants claimed to be financial creditors based on agreements/Memorandum of Understanding for purchasing units in projects developed by AMR Infrastructures. According to the agreements, the applicants were to pay a substantial portion of the sale consideration upfront, and AMR Infrastructures was to pay a particular amount each month as 'Committed Returns/Assured Returns' until physical possession of the units. AMR Infrastructures stopped paying these returns from April 2014 for some applicants and January 2014 for others. The application was initially dismissed on the grounds that the applicants were
…The present app…
The applicati…