Right of unsecured creditors before bifr.
Deepesh Nayak
(Querist) 15 June 2013
This query is : Resolved
Dear friends,
A Sick Industrial Company had prepared a Draft Rehabilitation Scheme (DRS) and presented it before BIFR for its approval. An unsecured creditor filed and application before BIFR requiring that Company had not incorporated its dues in the said DRS and accordingly the said DRS has to be declared as incomplete and a fresh DRS should be filed by the Company with incorporating of theirs dues.
Friends, let me know that whether unsecured creditors have right for any such types of application or can BIFR pass a declaratory order that contention of unsecured creditors is right and directed to company to file new DRS with incorporating dues of unsecured creditors.
Please share yours view with supporting of landmark case laws.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 15 June 2013
Please refer the recently decided case of Delhi High Court :
Continental Carbon India Private Limited v. Modi Rubber Limited Reserved on: 06.07.2012
Date of decision: 31.07.2012 WP (C) No.4854 of 2011
M V Gupta
(Expert) 15 June 2013
Dear Rajendra, will u pl set out gist of the decision for the benefit of all concerned?
Deepesh Nayak
(Querist) 17 June 2013
Thanks you so much Rajendra Sir,
I studied the referred case law as you suggested and find that points of reference of that case was some how similar but very particular in facts regarding right of unsecured creditors to declined the lower amount.
Please also suggest how can i compared this with my query.
Waiting for your next valuable reply.
Regards,
Deepesh
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 17 June 2013
Sir, a portion of the last para of decision is as under :
"The petitioner as an unsecured creditor has the option not to accept the scaled down value of its dues and wait till the scheme of rehabilitation of the respondent company has worked itself out with an option to recover its debt post such rehabilitation."
Guest
(Expert) 17 June 2013
Mr. Deepesh,
Your query is not understood as in which capacity you have posted the query, whether you are the said unsecured creditor, or you have any relation with the sick company?
Secondly, you have not stated what is the status of the creditor's application before the BIFR?
I would like to reply your query after you clarify my points of issue.
Deepesh Nayak
(Querist) 17 June 2013
Good Noon Sirs,
Sorry i didn't mentioned about any more of the fact.
Sir, as i am a practitioner, so i just wanted to know the reply on both the side. Will yours answer differ in the case if i am Company or vice versa.
Please suggest me further.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 17 June 2013
deepesh! This particular section of LCI is not meant for such academic discussion rather this is devoted only for the really needy poor persons. If you want to discuss then post your query in forum section.
Deepesh Nayak
(Querist) 18 June 2013
Thanks you Mr. Raj Kumar sir,
I would like to inform you that the question is not like only a academic nature, but its become a crucial matter for which a case have been running since many years on the same ground that what is the status of application of unsecured creditor before BIFR. If the same was of a academic nature, so it has resolved since time ago rather it still open because no satisfactorily reply received yet. However, on the basis of your valuable suggestion i have posted my query on forum section also.
Sir, please reply me on the matter.
Thanks.
Guest
(Expert) 18 June 2013
Mr. Deepesh,
I really wonder on your cross-question, "Will yours answer differ in the case if i am Company or vice versa," like an examiner or investigator instead of replying my query in full. Do, you feel that by posing such irrelevant question, instead of replying my queries, you can compel me to answer your queries, where earlier I really wanted to help you if you could have supplied the wanting information about your query?
But, mind it, you have still not answered my 2nd query about the status of the creditor's application before the BIFR.
To be frank, your query won't evoke any satisfactorily reply due, as you don't want to share even the barest minimum facts and background of the problem.
Do you know why I asked you in which capacity you have posted the query, whether as creditor or what relation you have with the sick company? Your profile speaks about you as a "PROPRIETOR." There is no such position of "proprietor" in a registered company. Can you suggest on what ground I should have presumeed that you would have posed the query in the capacity of a practitioner that too as a practitioner in law or what else?
Sorry, Mr. Deepesh, you really don't deserve any help, at least from me (can't say about others).
Deepesh Nayak
(Querist) 18 June 2013
Dear Mr. Dhingra,
Thanks for information that i am not deserve for any help.
I just requested and not begged from anyone specially you.
Please note that there is no need to disclose any more facts about the case, as the case is very clear in words, in academic language you can say it "Theoretical Question or Direct Question" and not practical case law study, for which more facts are required to be understand.
I would further like to inform you that on the basis of existing facts as posted by me on the group i have received more and more valuable suggestions and reply from other groups and no one called me any more information to understand the case.
Please note that i am new comer on the group as i recently joined the group and it was my first query before some expert of the groups. Please also note that the term "Proprietor" as showing you, is my profile items which has no any way relation to my query, it always show you as it is. and i am much aware that there is no terms like proprietor in the Company.
Please also note that i didn't cross question it just simply asked to you. But unfortunately you have taken it otherwise. Sorry, but i never expect like this from you which really wanted to help me.
At last, my question is very clear itself and no need to disclose any more information about this, as i just want to particulars reply which can be given by any sincere members on the basis of existing facts if you couldnt that your problem.
Thanks you for reading a hard lesson of the life, it will really help me for my professional carrier.
Thanks you and good bye to all....
Guest
(Expert) 18 June 2013
Nice of you Mr. Deepesh, for more clarification and your perception that no more disclosure was required and also that in your terms you have not cross-questioned me and that you begged from anyone and specially from me. So, in your views, you consider your commanding attitude, as a sort of begging from others. Anyway, you are welcome to keep on with your own perceptions.
On one hand you say, "on the basis of existing facts as posted by me on the group i have received more and more valuable suggestions and reply from other groups," but on the other you earlier admitted in your post, "it still open because no satisfactorily reply received yet." NICE CONTRADICTION THROUGH YOUR OWN WORDS.
The question arises, if you received more and more valuable suggestions and reply from other groups, I wonder, why did you feel the need for posting your query here and also in the forum section on the suggestion of Shri Raj Kumar Makkad? Hope, for my knowledge also, you would like to provide the related weblink on which you received more and more valuable suggestions and reply.
Deepesh Nayak
(Querist) 18 June 2013
Mr. Dhingra,
In reply of yours first para i have still the same views and no need for yours suggestion.
For second para, i wrote "it still open because no satisfactorily reply received yet." its only open for this particular group. Therefore no question for any contradiction arise.
Sir,i dont argue with you further, so please close the matter now. I would happy if you apply your mind to answered my query rather than argue with me.
Thanks you and good bye...
Guest
(Expert) 18 June 2013
Mr. Deepesh,
I feel, a learned person like you, need no clarification on legal issues or begging from anyone, So, I don't feel the need to apply my mind unnecessarily just to fulfill your commanding desire, "I would happy if you apply your mind to answered my query rather than argue with me," particularly due to your own perceptions where you feel no need to disclose any more information about your query. Mind it, your own false and whimsical presentations and commanding tone has invited argument.
I had also noted what was the style of your reply about the status of the BIFR case, which you have already modified now by editing process.
I just wonder, when as per your own response, you have already received more and more valuable suggestions and reply from other groups, why you want my reply to your query and what restrained you to cite the respective link of satisfactory replies?
Rest depends upon other members, what they prefer to do about your query.
Moreover, you have already posted your query in the forum section where you can get ample replies on your query by virtue of which you can confirm your own perceptions.
Thanks & bye.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 20 June 2013
I strongly stand with Ld. Dhingra G. If a querist is not in a mood to understand the things then experts have no grudge against him.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 20 June 2013
As gist an unsecured creditor gets what is left after dining of secured creditors.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 21 June 2013
For understanding what Mr Prabhakar singh said in one line one doe snto need to be highly enlightened.
You could have raised query with full facts even in beginning.
Vijyant Nigam (09807349001)
(Expert) 23 June 2013
"an unsecured creditor gets what is left after dining of secured creditors."
awesome definition by shri prabhakar ji.
today i learned this...
as a lawyer learns something new in law, everyday.
thanks to
prabhakar ji
