Latest news with #PhoenixARC
Economic Times
03-08-2025
- Business
- Economic Times
NCLT excludes Phoenix ARC from Committee of Creditors in Hotel Horizon case
Synopsis The NCLT partially approved Hotel Horizon's promoters' plea, excluding Phoenix ARC's claim from the CIRP due to limitation. Oberoi Realty's consortium secured CoC approval to acquire the company for Rs 919 crore. The tribunal instructed a claim rework for JMFARC and directed reverification of UBI's claims, while CFM ARC appeals the Phoenix ARC decision. Agencies The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has partially allowed the application filed by the suspended promoters of Hotel Horizon, directing the exclusion of asset reconstruction company Phoenix ARC's claim from the ongoing corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP), citing it as barred by Horizon's key asset is a prime 1.85-acre land parcel in Mumbai's plush Juhu area, overlooking the Arabian Sea. Last month, Oberoi Realty in partnership with Shree Naman Developers and JM Financial Properties secured the approval of the committee of creditors (CoC) to acquire the company through the consortium's resolution plan, involving a total settlement of Rs 919 crore, was cleared by the CoC, with the resolution professional (RP) issuing a formal letter of latest order, passed on July 17, said that the debt claimed by Phoenix ARC, which had acquired the loan from IDFC Bank, was time-barred and could not be considered a financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The tribunal also instructed the RP to rework the claim admitted for JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company (JMFARC), factoring in the refund of a Rs 14 crore processing fee and interest, originally agreed upon by ICICI Bank in a credit committee development follows a challenge by Sagar and Vishal Sharma, the suspended directors of Hotel Horizon, who had sought removal of four creditors--Union Bank of India, ACRE, JMFARC and Phoenix ARC--from the CoC, alleging that their claims were inflated, fictitious and dismissing the request to remove UBI, ACRE and JMFARC from the CoC, the NCLT directed the RP to reverify Union Bank of India's admitted claims, including applicable interest rates and other levies, considering subsequent agreements that might supersede the original facility Agarwal, founder of MAAK Legal, along with counsels Pulkit Sharma and Rohan Agrawal appeared for the promoters of Hotel tribunal held that debts owed to Union Bank of India, ACRE and JMFARC were not barred by limitation due to continued acknowledgements of liability by the corporate debtor through one-time settlement proposals, balance sheets and communications extending the limitation contrast, Phoenix ARC's claim, previously dismissed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in 2020 for being time-barred, could not be reconsidered. The NCLT held that in the absence of any stay on the NCLAT order by the Supreme Court, it remained the tribunal clarified that additional interest, liquidated damages and interest on arrears of such damages do constitute financial debt, reinforcing the principle that such charges are intrinsically linked to lending arrangements and risk-based CFM ARC, which acquired the debt from Phoenix ARC, has filed an appeal before the NCLAT seeking a stay in the matter.
Time of India
03-08-2025
- Business
- Time of India
NCLT excludes Phoenix ARC from Committee of Creditors in Hotel Horizon case
The National Company Law Tribunal ( NCLT ) has partially allowed the application filed by the suspended promoters of Hotel Horizon , directing the exclusion of asset reconstruction company Phoenix ARC 's claim from the ongoing corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP), citing it as barred by limitation. Hotel Horizon's key asset is a prime 1.85-acre land parcel in Mumbai's plush Juhu area, overlooking the Arabian Sea. Explore courses from Top Institutes in Please select course: Select a Course Category Last month, Oberoi Realty in partnership with Shree Naman Developers and JM Financial Properties secured the approval of the committee of creditors (CoC) to acquire the company through the CIRP. The consortium's resolution plan, involving a total settlement of Rs 919 crore, was cleared by the CoC, with the resolution professional (RP) issuing a formal letter of intent. The latest order, passed on July 17, said that the debt claimed by Phoenix ARC, which had acquired the loan from IDFC Bank, was time-barred and could not be considered a financial debt under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). Live Events The tribunal also instructed the RP to rework the claim admitted for JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Company (JMFARC), factoring in the refund of a Rs 14 crore processing fee and interest, originally agreed upon by ICICI Bank in a credit committee resolution. The development follows a challenge by Sagar and Vishal Sharma, the suspended directors of Hotel Horizon, who had sought removal of four creditors--Union Bank of India, ACRE, JMFARC and Phoenix ARC--from the CoC, alleging that their claims were inflated, fictitious and time-barred. While dismissing the request to remove UBI, ACRE and JMFARC from the CoC, the NCLT directed the RP to reverify Union Bank of India 's admitted claims, including applicable interest rates and other levies, considering subsequent agreements that might supersede the original facility agreement. Akash Agarwal, founder of MAAK Legal, along with counsels Pulkit Sharma and Rohan Agrawal appeared for the promoters of Hotel Horizon. The tribunal held that debts owed to Union Bank of India, ACRE and JMFARC were not barred by limitation due to continued acknowledgements of liability by the corporate debtor through one-time settlement proposals, balance sheets and communications extending the limitation period. In contrast, Phoenix ARC's claim, previously dismissed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in 2020 for being time-barred, could not be reconsidered. The NCLT held that in the absence of any stay on the NCLAT order by the Supreme Court, it remained binding. Further, the tribunal clarified that additional interest, liquidated damages and interest on arrears of such damages do constitute financial debt, reinforcing the principle that such charges are intrinsically linked to lending arrangements and risk-based pricing. Meanwhile, CFM ARC, which acquired the debt from Phoenix ARC, has filed an appeal before the NCLAT seeking a stay in the matter. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )
Indian Express
18-06-2025
- Business
- Indian Express
HDFC Bank CEO moves Bombay HC to quash FIR based on Lilavati Trust's complaint over ‘Rs 2 crore bribe'
HDFC Bank Managing Director and CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan has approached the Bombay High Court challenging the First Information Report (FIR) filed against him on a complaint by Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust (LKMM Trust), which oversees the Lilavati Hospital in Bandra (West), a prominent healthcare institution in Mumbai. Jagdishan has moved the high court seeking to quash the FIR which has accused him of accepting a bribe of Rs 2.05 crore to help a group consisting of one Chetan Mehta and other erstwhile trustees to retain illegal control over the trust. When the matter came up for hearing before a bench of Justices A S Gadkari and Rajesh S Patil, Justice Patil recused himself from hearing the matter after which it was mentioned before a division bench led by Justice Sarang V Kotwal. Justice Kotwal too recused himself from hearing the matter, noting that he had earlier represented one of the trustees. The petitioner will now have to approach the high court administration for assignment of another bench. The HDFC Bank CEO, through senior advocate Amit Desai, claimed that the FIR was baseless and malicious. On May 29, the magistrate court had ordered the Bandra police to register offences punishable under sections 406, 409 (criminal breach of trust) and 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and had directed the police to probe the matter as per section 175 (3) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The Bandra police registered the FIR on May 31. The trust, through its authorised representative Prashant Mehta, had filed a complaint contending that there was a loan recovery proceeding going on with a company, of which the father of one of the present trustees was office-bearer and the HDFC Bank, a creditor. The complaint claimed that during the recovery proceedings, the father of the said trustee was harassed physically and mentally, which resulted in his death. After assuming office, Prashant allegedly found a diary showing that from time to time several amounts were transferred on Chetan Mehta's directions to Jagdishan, totalling Rs 2.05 crore. Prashant claimed that the said amount was paid by Chetan Mehta and six others who were erstwhile office bearers of the trust, with a sole view to harass the father of one of the trustees. Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Komalsing Rajput, in the May 29 order, noted the contents of the diary showed that amounts were transferred from time to time, that the allegations constituted cognizable offences and the amount involved was 'high'. The magistrate noted that to verify and collect evidence to ascertain the source of amounts and how they were transferred without any reason, a police probe was necessary and hence ordered a probe by the Bandra police. The Bandra police had registered another FIR on May 31 against Chetan Mehta, M/s Phoenix ARC and others for embezzlement of trust funds to the tune of Rs 2.25 crore. Phoenix ARC, along with accused persons Keki Elavia and Venkatu Srinivasan have also approached the high court seeking quashing of the embezzlement FIR against them. The high court will hear the pleas in due course.
