The appellant, Anjani Technoplast Ltd., received two loans from the respondent, Shubh Gautam, in 2010. Cheques issued as security were dishonoured, leading to a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Despite two compromise deeds, the appellant did not fully honour them. The respondent filed a summary suit in the Delhi High Court, which resulted in a decree for Rs. 4,38,00,617/- with 24% interest on 11.01.2018. This decree was upheld on appeal and attained finality after the Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's Special Leave Petition on 22.10.2021. Instead of executing the decree, the respondent filed a Section 7 IBC petition before the NCLT on 13.12.2021, claiming the decretal amount as a financial debt. The NCLT dismissed the petition, but the NCLAT
…Anjani Technoplast Ltd. (appellant) preferred an appeal under Section 62 of the IBC against the NCLAT order dated 01.11.2022.
The NCLAT order set aside the NCLT order dated 20.06.2022 and directed the admission of a Section 7 IBC petition filed by Shubh Gautam (respondent).
On 24.02.2010, Shubh Gautam advanced a loan of Rs. 2,50,00,000/- to the appellant for two months at 12.75% p.a. interest.
On 31.03.2010, a further loan of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- was taken by the appellant for fifteen days at 3% per month interest.
The appellant furnished cheques as security for both loans, which were later dishonoured.
The respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
…Sign in to view the parties.
Shubh Gautam advanced a loan of Rs.…
Anjani Technoplast Ltd. took a further loan of…
The appellant, Anjani Technoplast Ltd., received two loans from the respondent, Shubh Gautam, in 2010. Cheques issued as security were dishonoured, leading to a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Despite two compromise deeds, the appellant did not fully honour them. The respondent filed a summary suit in the Delhi High Court, which resulted in a decree for Rs. 4,38,00,617/- with 24% interest on 11.01.2018. This decree was upheld on appeal and attained finality after the Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's Special Leave Petition on 22.10.2021. Instead of executing the decree, the respondent filed a Section 7 IBC petition before the NCLT on 13.12.2021, claiming the decretal amount as a financial debt. The NCLT dismissed the petition, but the NCLAT
…Anjani Technoplast Ltd. (appellant) preferred an appeal under Section 62 of the IBC against the NCLAT order dated 01.11.2022.
The NCLAT order set aside the NCLT order dated 20.06.2022 and directed the admission of a Section 7 IBC petition filed by Shubh Gautam (respondent).
On 24.02.2010, Shubh Gautam advanced a loan of Rs. 2,50,00,000/- to the appellant for two months at 12.75% p.a. interest.
On 31.03.2010, a further loan of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- was taken by the appellant for fifteen days at 3% per month interest.
The appellant furnished cheques as security for both loans, which were later dishonoured.
The respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
…Shubh Gautam advanced a loan of Rs.…
Anjani Technoplast Ltd. took a further loan of…