Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + AT Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2017 (10) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2017 (10) TMI 913 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy


  1. 2021 (10) TMI 144 - SC
  2. 2019 (12) TMI 1023 - HC
  3. 2024 (4) TMI 477 - AT
  4. 2023 (10) TMI 893 - AT
  5. 2023 (8) TMI 859 - AT
  6. 2023 (3) TMI 21 - AT
  7. 2022 (11) TMI 957 - AT
  8. 2022 (11) TMI 348 - AT
  9. 2022 (10) TMI 587 - AT
  10. 2022 (4) TMI 833 - AT
  11. 2022 (3) TMI 414 - AT
  12. 2022 (2) TMI 465 - AT
  13. 2022 (1) TMI 461 - AT
  14. 2021 (11) TMI 473 - AT
  15. 2021 (4) TMI 813 - AT
  16. 2020 (9) TMI 123 - AT
  17. 2018 (5) TMI 644 - AT
  18. 2018 (5) TMI 173 - AT
  19. 2017 (12) TMI 651 - AT
  20. 2018 (6) TMI 1259 - AT
  21. 2017 (12) TMI 101 - AT
  22. 2017 (11) TMI 841 - AT
  23. 2022 (11) TMI 1401 - Tri
  24. 2021 (5) TMI 112 - Tri
  25. 2021 (4) TMI 1078 - Tri
  26. 2021 (6) TMI 115 - Tri
  27. 2021 (1) TMI 655 - Tri
  28. 2020 (10) TMI 593 - Tri
  29. 2020 (10) TMI 115 - Tri
  30. 2021 (2) TMI 147 - Tri
  31. 2020 (2) TMI 1422 - Tri
  32. 2020 (3) TMI 1056 - Tri
  33. 2020 (3) TMI 1128 - Tri
  34. 2019 (12) TMI 1298 - Tri
  35. 2019 (11) TMI 1597 - Tri
  36. 2020 (2) TMI 911 - Tri
  37. 2020 (3) TMI 1209 - Tri
  38. 2019 (10) TMI 1272 - Tri
  39. 2019 (8) TMI 1480 - Tri
  40. 2019 (8) TMI 1713 - Tri
  41. 2019 (7) TMI 1021 - Tri
  42. 2019 (4) TMI 798 - Tri
  43. 2019 (5) TMI 986 - Tri
  44. 2019 (2) TMI 1621 - Tri
  45. 2019 (3) TMI 618 - Tri
  46. 2018 (10) TMI 1747 - Tri
  47. 2018 (12) TMI 887 - Tri
  48. 2018 (11) TMI 609 - Tri
  49. 2018 (11) TMI 1013 - Tri
  50. 2018 (10) TMI 1738 - Tri
  51. 2018 (11) TMI 690 - Tri
  52. 2018 (8) TMI 1988 - Tri
  53. 2018 (9) TMI 1529 - Tri
  54. 2018 (5) TMI 2001 - Tri
  55. 2018 (7) TMI 512 - Tri
  56. 2018 (4) TMI 1806 - Tri
  57. 2018 (3) TMI 1778 - Tri
  58. 2018 (2) TMI 1837 - Tri
  59. 2017 (12) TMI 1766 - Tri
  60. 2018 (1) TMI 1248 - Tri
  61. 2018 (1) TMI 1246 - Tri
  62. 2017 (10) TMI 1580 - Tri
  63. 2017 (9) TMI 1768 - Tri
  64. 2017 (7) TMI 1352 - Tri
  65. 2017 (6) TMI 1226 - Tri
Issues Involved:
1. Maintainability of the application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (I&B Code) filed through a Power of Attorney Holder.
2. Specific authorization requirement for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
3. Validity of the removal of defects within the prescribed period.

Issue-wise Analysis:

1. Maintainability of the application under Section 7 of the I&B Code filed through a Power of Attorney Holder:

The core issue was whether a Power of Attorney Holder, authorized before the enactment of the I&B Code, could file an application under Section 7. The Adjudicating Authority had a divided opinion, leading to a larger Bench's decision. The majority judgment held that specific authorization for initiating CIRP is necessary. The Tribunal emphasized that the I&B Code and Adjudicating Authority Rules recognize that a Financial Creditor, being a juristic person, can only act through an "Authorized Representative." The Tribunal concluded that a Power of Attorney Holder is not competent to file such an application, as the Code mandates specific authorization.

2. Specific authorization requirement for initiating CIRP:

The Tribunal explored the necessity of specific authorization for initiating CIRP. It referred to various rules and provisions, including Section 7 of the I&B Code, Adjudicating Authority Rules, and NCLT Rules, 2016. The Tribunal noted that the I&B Code is a complete code in itself, and the provisions of the Power of Attorney Act, 1882, cannot override the specific requirements of the I&B Code. The Tribunal held that only an "authorized person," distinct from a "Power of Attorney Holder," could make an application under Section 7, and such authorization must be explicitly stated by the Board of Directors.

3. Validity of the removal of defects within the prescribed period:

The Tribunal addressed the objection regarding the removal of defects within the seven-day period. The Corporate Debtor argued that the defects were not removed within the stipulated time. However, the Tribunal clarified that the seven days should be counted from the date of receipt of the notice from the Adjudicating Authority, excluding holidays. The Tribunal found no specific pleadings from the Corporate Debtor regarding the date of receipt of the notice and accepted the Financial Creditor's stand that the defects were removed within the permissible period, considering the holidays.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal dismissed all appeals and affirmed the order of admission of the application under Section 7. It held that while a Power of Attorney Holder is not empowered to file an application under the I&B Code, an authorized person with specific authorization from the Board of Directors can do so. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of adhering to the specific provisions of the I&B Code and the necessity of proper authorization for initiating CIRP.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates