Back
NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL
Praveen Gupta, Judicial Member, Ashish Verma, Technical Member
Rachit Agarwal HUF – Appellant
Versus
Shivam Traders and Hire Purchase Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks nbfc deposit repayment under rbi act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. parties dispute limitation, deposit nature, agreement absence. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. undisputed advance; objections on limitation and default. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. limitation extended by acknowledgements and covid order. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. oral deposits valid; unsecured loans are deposits. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. similar agreements invalid due to conflicts. (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 7. direct repayment post-reconciliation; petition allowed. (Para 26 , 27) |
ORDER
1. The present petition has been filed by Rachit Agarwal HUF (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Petitioner’) against Shivam Traders and Hire and Purchase Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Respondent/Respondent Company’) on 29.09.2024, under Section 45QA of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (hereinafter referred to as the “RBI Act”) read with Rule 65 of NCLT Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘NCLT Rules’), on account of the Respondent’s failure to repay the deposit made by the Petitioner. Through this petition, the Petitioner seeks, inter alia, the following reliefs:
“(i) that the company, above
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
