# In the matter of Floram Shoes (India) Private Limited

> NCLT judgment dated 2023-11-23. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLT-00589. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner & Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 23 Nov 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLT-00589
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/floram-shoes-india-private-limited-3b17f64d

## Summary

### Background

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner & Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization filed an application under Rule 11 of NCLT Rules, 2016 r/w Section 38(3), 42 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking to set aside the order dated 05.06.2021 issued by the Respondent (Liquidator) and to direct the Respondent to admit the claim of Rs.2,42,12,170/- towards statutory dues payable by the Corporate Debtor, Floram Shoes (India) Private Limited, in respect of its contract employees engaged through United Design Studio. The liquidation of the Corporate Debtor was ordered on 27.01.2021, and the Respondent was appointed as the Liquidator. A public announcement was made on 13.02.2021, with the last date of submission of claims fixed as 15.03.2021.

…

## Facts

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner & Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization (Applicant) filed a claim for Rs.2,42,12,170/- against Floram Shoes (India) Private Limited (Corporate Debtor) which is under liquidation. The claim includes statutory dues for employees engaged through United Design Studio. The Liquidator partially admitted Rs.2,21,81,533/- but rejected Rs.20,30,637/- related to damage and interest. The Applicant contends that the Corporate Debtor is the principal employer of United Design Studio. The Liquidator argues that United Design Studio is a separate entity and the claim is not substantiated with proper documents. A letter from the Corporate Debtor's suspended director, used as evidence, was issued after CIRP initiation. The

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the rejection of the claim in respect of M/s. United Design Studio requires interference …

**Ratio:** The Liquidator has the power to call for evidence to substantiate claims under Regulation

…

**Reasoning:** The Tribunal found that the Applicant did not provide sufficient documents to show that

…

**Interpretation:** Regulation 20 and 23 of the IBBI (Liquidation Process) Regulation 2016 provide

…

**Application:** The Applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence, beyond the recovery

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** SANJIV…; RAVICHANDRAN…
- **Appellants:** THE ASSISTANT…
- **Respondents:** FLORAM SHOES…; Shri.Amier Hamsa…

## Timeline

- **2019-07-31 — CIRP Init…**: CIRP of the Corporate Debtor…
- **2020-02-18 — Letter from Suspended…**: Letter issued by the erstwhile director of the Corporate Debtor, relied upon by the…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 38(3) — Consolidation of claims](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-38)

---

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/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/floram-shoes-india-private-limited-3b17f64d