SC Upholds Rejection of Secured Creditor Claim Without Charge Documents

Case Details: Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking vs. Ashok Kumar Golecha - [2026] 186 taxmann.com 859 (SC)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Manoj Misra & Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.
• Karan Bhide, Kedar Nayak, Tavinder Sidhu & Rohit Jaiswal, Advs. for the Appellant.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the corporate debtor had been put into liquidation. The appellant, a government undertaking, submitted its claim in liquidation as a secured financial creditor of corporate debtor.

However, the liquidator had classified the appellant as an unsecured financial creditor and admitted only a claim for the principal amount, while rejecting a claim for interest.

The Adjudicating Authority (NCLT) had upheld the decision of the liquidator. The appellant had not provided any other supporting documentary evidence to substantiate the interest clause in the agreement.

The impugned order of the NCLAT held that, in the absence of a charge document, the creditor could not have been treated as a Secured Financial Creditor of the Corporate Debtor; thus, there was no infirmity in the liquidator’s decision not to treat the appellant as a secured financial creditor.

Supreme Court Held

The Supreme Court held that, having regard to reasons recorded by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, particularly, paragraph No.17 of its judgment, the instant court did not find any question of law arising for consideration in the instant appeal and thus the appeal was accordingly dismissed.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Brihanmumbai Elelctric Supply and Transport Undertaking vs. Ashok Kumar Golecha [2025] 175 taxmann.com 632 (NCLAT- New Delhi)/[2026] 266 COMP CASE 381 (NCLAT- New Delhi) (para 1) affirmed