Your lawyer is absolutely correct
2) you should not agitate the issue of partial loan disbursement
3) it does not help your case as 2.20 cr was disbursed
(IBC Act 2016) CIRP appeal at NCLAT - partial disbursement of sanctioned loan
Bank has filed application against our company. 4 Term Loan Accounts. One Cash Credit Account. In 1 TL account 3.60 Cr was sanctioned but only 2.2 Cr was disbursed. Further disbursement was refused basically since other TL accounts were getting overdue. Sanctioned dates of TL accounts are from Year 2009,,2010,2012,2013 But Bank produced statements before NCLT from 31st March 2015 and not from Inception. There is no single Loan Disbursement Entry in a/c statements. Concealment was the intention. Additionally Bank Wrote under oath through affidavit that all Sanctioned has been fully disbursed on time. Still NCLT admitted the petition, ignoring this all. Over an above NCLT falsely stated that Corporate debtor has not contested the Disbursement aspect. We have contested the disbursement aspect in our defense 2 - 3 times in different submissions before AA. Now we have appealed before NCLAT. They have asked us to file 3 page written submissions within next 3-4 days. Our Advocate says -- "don't argue about disbursement. since anyway 2.2 cr itself is more than threshold of 1 cr. So that way you are admitting to 2.2 Cr, receipt renewing the limitation of time barred application. Additionally all other TL accounts of about 5Cr were fully disbursed. So this is not helping out case at all". I have 3 days in hand. Please give me advice that should I report the Falsehood by FC about partial disbursement and stating otherwise in my written submissions or not? The impact of partial disbursement has resulted in my business getting NPA. What is the resource/ remedy in IBC act that can help me here? Company has already made a mistake by not going to consumer forum that time itself in 2014. Now that remedy is time barred. Should I agitate the issue of Partial Loan disbursement before AA or not?? Will it help anyway or not? Please share your valuable advice ASAP. Thanks.
Asked 2 years ago in Business Law
First answer received in 10 minutes.
Lawyers are available now to answer your questions.
5 Answers
Under law of limitation, remedy pursued before wrong forum is not taken into consideration for computation of limitation.
If you feel Consumer Forum will give better results you can approach consumer forum even now withdrawing proceedings pending proceedings declaring intention to approach consumer forum.
Any statement false statement material to the adjudication of dispute will result in adverse inference against the party. You are advised to explain it with documentary proof to AA.
Disbursement in part is not disbursement. That has affected you business, you have strong reason to bring to the notice of AA the same. Due to partial disbursement whole calculations gone awry.
Three days for filing WS is not reasonable, you can seek extension of same to two weeks.
It is advisable that you should always confine to the case before you and should not mix up the other pending cases to this. Thus whatever the problems are grievances you are undergoing in this particular case has to be highlighted in your objections/statements unless this subject will not come to the knowledge of the appellate tribunal.
However if your advocate is advising against then you may have either follow his advise or seek a second opinion from a different lawyer about the advise rendered by this lawyer and suggestions to proceed further.
You can decide the issue based on the gravity of grievance that you were made to suffer.
1. Yes report it ASAP.
2. Yes consumer forum will be a good forum if they are service provider.
Dear Sir,
If you need any further assistance.You can approach me through Kaanoon or LinkedIn.
The loans were sanctioned from 2009 onwards
Disbursement happened thereafter
Whether full or partial that is under dispute
But how your advocate is saying that the application of the bank is time barred ? On what basis ?
Limitation period has to be computed from date of default and not from sanction date or disbursal date
I would like to read the NCLT order before commenting further
