Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
DAHIBEN GULAB SHAH – Appellant
Versus
Mr. Anuj Bajpai – Respondent
ORDER
1. Mr. Shikhar Khandelwal a/w Mr. Punit Jain i/b Nipeksh Jain, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant present. Mr. Aman Jhawar i/b Gravitas Legal, Ld. Counsel for the Liquidator present.
2. APPEAL-28(MB)/2023: This Company Appeal is filed by Dahiben Gulab Shah under Section 42 of the IBC r/w Rule 11 of the NCLT Rules, 2016 for seeking appropriate directions against the Liquidator to accept the claim of the Applicant against the Corporate Debtor as also to condone the delay in filing the claim before the Liquidator.
2.1 The Appellant states that the directors of the Corporate Debtor had approached the Appellant through brokers for hand loan for construction of the building saying that commencement certificate of building was obtained and if loan was granted then the same would be paid within six months with interest @33% p.a. Hence, the Appellant granted loan of ₹25,00,000/-, which was secured by (i) Promissory Note, (ii) MoU dated 22.02.2013, (iii) Allotment Letter, (iv) Agreement for sale, (v) Possession letter, (vi) Power of Attorney dated 22.02.
The liquidator's partial acceptance of a claim due to lack of supporting documents is valid, affirming the need for proper evidence in disputed insolvency claims.
Liquidator must comply with Tribunal's directives; failure to do so constitutes misconduct.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article