# In the matter of Guardian Homes Private Limited IA-2433(MB)2020 in C.P.(IB)-3113(MB)2019

> NCLT judgment dated 2022-03-14. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLT-03763. Apya Capital Services Private Limited filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 14 Mar 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLT-03763
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/guardian-homes-private-limited-ia-2433mb2020-in-cpib-3113mb2019-617c766b

## Summary

### Background

Apya Capital Services Private Limited filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) against Guardian Homes Private Limited (Corporate Debtor). The Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench) dismissed the application, citing a deficiency in service provided by Apya Capital and the absence of a claimed debt. Apya Capital appealed this decision, which was initially set aside by the NCLAT, directing the Tribunal to admit the petition after providing an opportunity for the Corporate Debtor to settle the claim. The NCLAT's order was based on the premise that Guardian Homes had obtained funding through Apya Capital's services but had only made

…

## Facts

Apya Capital Services Private Limited (Appellant) provided financial services to Guardian Homes Private Limited (Corporate Debtor), including raising finance and advisory services for debt instruments. A letter dated 08.11.2017 outlined the terms and conditions for these services. A sanction letter dated 16.10.2018 indicated that Rs. 280 Crores were granted to the Corporate Debtor by KKR India Asset Finance Pvt. Ltd. Apya Capital raised proforma invoices on 16.01.2019, 30.01.2019, 27.02.2019, and 20.04.2019. The Corporate Debtor communicated on 02.05.2019 about delays in service delivery, claiming it took 11 months instead of the agreed 6 months. The Corporate Debtor claimed to have amicably decided to conclude the deal at a fee of Rs. 150 Lakhs, out of which Rs. 75

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the Adjudicating Authority erred in dismissing the application under Section 9 of the …

**Ratio:** The Adjudicating Authority's decision can be overturned if it is found to have made

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLAT found that the Adjudicating Authority erred in holding that there was no debt

…

**Interpretation:** The Adjudicating Authority's role is to determine whether a debt exists and

…

**Application:** In this case, the NCLAT found that the Adjudicating Authority's findings were

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** ANURADHA SANJAY…; SUCHITRA KANUPARTH…; +1 more
- **Appellants:** Apya Capital…
- **Respondents:** Guardian Homes…

## Timeline

- **2017-11-08 — Engagement…**: Appellant issued engagement letter incorporating terms and conditions for providing…
- **2018-10-16 — Sanction…**: Sanction letter revealed that Rs. 280 Crores were granted to the Corporate Debtor by KKR…

## Legal provisions

- [Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Section 60(5) — Adjudicating Authority for corporate persons](https://caseease.in/legal-provisions/insolvency-and-bankruptcy-code-2016/section-60)

---

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/guardian-homes-private-limited-ia-2433mb2020-in-cpib-3113mb2019-617c766b