Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

5. 'Andhra Bank Vs. M/s. FM Hammerle Paras 10-11 Textile Ltd.' (2018) SCC OnLine NCLAT

883.

6. 'State Bank of India Vs. Mr. Animesh Para 14 Mukhopadhyay', (2021) SCC OnLine NCLAT 30.

7. 'State Bank of India Vs. Athena Energy' Paras 16-19 (2020) SCC OnLine NCLAT 774.

8. 'Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Paras 8-9 Company Ltd. Vs. Gwalior Bypass Projects', Company Appeal (AT) (Ins) No. 1186 of 2019.

.............................................................................
124. Shri Bhushan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of EARC, strongly relying on the judgment of NCLAT dated 14-8-2018 passed in Export Import Bank of India v. JEKPL (P) Ltd. Resolution Professional, submits that NCLAT itself in the said case had held that invocation of corporate guarantee has no nexus with filing of the claim pursuant to public announcement made under Section 13(1)(b) read with Section 15(1)(c) of the I&B Code and also for collating the claim under Section 18(1)(b) or for updating claim under Section 25(2)(e). He submits that civil appeal challenging the said judgment and order has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 23-1-2019.
125. He submits that NCLAT itself in the said Export Import Bank of India case had directed EXIM Bank and Axis Bank to be treated as "financial creditors"

and had further directed them to be given representation on CoC. He submits that, however, in the present case, NCLAT has taken a contrary view. He therefore submits that in the alternative this Court should direct RP/CoC to treat EARC as a "financial creditor" and give it representation on CoC and take a decision in accordance with law.

126. We find that the said case, on facts, would not be applicable to the case at hand. No doubt that the appeal filed against the judgment and order of NCLAT dated 14-8-2018 has been dismissed by this Court on 23-1-2019. However, it is a settled law that dismissal of a special leave petition/appeal does not amount to affirmation of the view taken in the judgment impugned in the special leave petition/appeal. It will Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) Nos. 356 & 358 of 2022 also be relevant to refer to the order passed by this Court dated 23-1-2019 while dismissing the appeal, which reads thus:

127. It is to be noted that in the appeal before NCLAT, EXIM Bank as well as Axis Bank had taken steps immediately after the claim of the said Banks on the basis of corporate guarantee came to be rejected by RP/CoC. After rejection of the claim, the said Banks had filed an application under Section 60(5) before NCLT. On NCLT rejecting the said claim, those Banks had approached NCLAT in appeals which were allowed and the order, as stated hereinabove, was passed.