# In the matter of Sarga Hotel Pvt. Ltd.

> NCLT judgment dated 2023-11-30. Citation: TCN-2023-NCLT-00488. Rishima SA Investments LLC (Mauritius) filed an application under Section 60(5) of the…

- **Court:** NCLT
- **Order date:** 30 Nov 2023
- **Citation:** TCN-2023-NCLT-00488
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclt-division-bench-court-i-chenn/sarga-hotel-pvt-ltd-adb7a904

## Summary

### Background

Rishima SA Investments LLC (Mauritius) filed an application under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) challenging the rejection of its claim by the Resolution Professional (RP) of Sarga Hotels Pvt Ltd (Corporate Debtor). Rishima sought directions from the Adjudicating Authority to allow its claim of Rs. 1,32,89,75,268.00 as a financial debt or, alternatively, as 'other debts', and to allow it to participate in the Committee of Creditors (CoC) meetings. The claim stemmed from foreign arbitral awards related to a breach of a Share Subscription and Shareholders Agreement (SSHA) where SIDCL and the Corporate Debtor failed to purchase Rishima's shareholding at a price equivalent to the invested amount plus a 25% per annum return.

## Facts

Rishima SA Investments LLC (Mauritius) invested Rs. 80 Crore to acquire 35% shareholding in Sarga Hotel Pvt Ltd (Corporate Debtor). A Share Subscription and Shareholders Agreement (SSHA) stipulated that SIDCL and the Corporate Debtor were obliged to purchase Rishima's shareholding at a price equivalent to the invested amount plus a 25% per annum return (IRR). Due to a breach of the SSHA, Rishima initiated arbitration under the Singapore Arbitration Act 2001, resulting in foreign arbitral awards directing SIDCL and the Corporate Debtor to pay Rs. 132,39,33,646/- plus legal costs. Rishima filed Form C with the Resolution Professional (RP) of the Corporate Debtor, claiming the amount as a financial debt. The RP rejected the claim, leading Rishima to file Form F as 'other

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the claim made by the Applicant would …

**Ratio:** Section 5(8) of the IBC defines 'financial debt' as a debt disbursed against the

…

**Reasoning:** The NCLT reasoned that Rishima had not given any loan or made any financial accommodation

…

**Interpretation:** The interpretation of 'financial debt' under Section 5(8) of the IBC requires a

…

**Application:** In this case, the NCLT applied the definition of 'financial debt' to the facts

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** BIDISHA BA…; ARVIND DEVA…
- **Appellants:** Rishima SA…
- **Respondents:** SARGA HOTELS PVT.…; Avishek…
- **Advocates:** Manju Bhu…; Pooja Ma…; +10 more

## Timeline

- **2019-04-30 — Partial Awa…**: Partial award date of…
- **2019-05-30 — Interim Order by Delhi…**: Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its interim order dated 30.05.2019 held in Para 11 that…

## 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/sarga-hotel-pvt-ltd-adb7a904