Facts & Background:

• The China Development Bank was the Appellant.
• The Doha Bank Q.P.S.C. was the 1st Respondent, along with other Respondents, in the present case.
• The case involved Reliance Communications Infrastructure Ltd. (RCIL), Reliance Communications Ltd. (RCom), Reliance Telecom Ltd. (RTL), and RITL, collectively referred to as the “RCom entities.”
• A Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) was initiated against Reliance Infratel Limited (RITL). Under Section 15 of the IBC, the Appellant's claims were admitted as Financial Creditors, securing inclusion in the Committee of Creditors (CoC).
• The Respondent, Doha Bank, asserting its status as a direct lender and secured Financial Creditor of RITL, challenged the Appellant’s inclusion as Financial Creditors, contending that their claims were impermissibly based on Deeds of Hypothecation (DoH).
• During the pendency of the Respondent’s challenge, a Resolution Applicant submitted a Resolution Plan, which was approved by the CoC on 2nd March 2020.
• On 3rd December 2020, the NCLT approved the Resolution Plan without adjudicating Doha Bank’s challenge to the appellants’ status as Financial Creditors. The NCLAT directed the NCLT to decide on the application, potentially reconsidering approval.
• The Appellants relied on the Deeds of Hypothecation executed by RCom entities, including the Corporate Debtor, which created a charge on assets and stipulated joint liability to repay debts and cover shortfalls post-asset realisation.
• The NCLT dismissed Doha Bank’s application, upholding the Appellant’s status as a Financial Creditor, except for the Appellant in Civil Appeal No. 7434 of 2023.
• The NCLAT held that the Deeds of Hypothecation constituted a charge on the property of the Chargors, not deeds of guarantee. It ruled that the Chargers were not guarantors, set aside the NCLT order, de-recognized the Appellants, and remanded the matter.
  

Main Issue:

1. Whether the Appellants can be classified as 'Financial Creditors' within the meaning of sub-section (7) of Section 5 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC)?
2. If the Appellants were not deemed 'Financial Creditors,' can they be considered 'Secured Creditors' and entitled to payment commensurate with their security interest? (Paragraph 2)