Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2020 (7) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (7) TMI 515 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - existence of debt and dispute or not - HELD THAT - Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of M/S. INNOVENTIVE INDUSTRIES LTD. VERSUS ICICI BANK ANR. 2017 (9) TMI 58 - SUPREME COURT has ruled such that if the Adjudicating Authority is satisfied that there is a debt and default has been occurred, then the Adjudicating Authority is bound to admit the application - By placing reliance on the said decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court, the debt is well established and the default has been occurred because the outstanding loan is still unpaid. This satisfies the requirement of section 3(11) and (12) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for triggering the corporate insolvency resolution process in respect of the corporate debtor-company. It is undisputedly established that the petitioner-financial creditor duly sanctioned and have disbursed various loan facilities to the corporate debtor and the same were availed of and utilized by it. The corporate debtor also confirmed its debts liability, through onetime settlement by offering ₹ 1,600 lakhs to the petitioner by its letter dated December 7, 2017 which could not be materialized. The corporate debtor was irregular in making repayment of its loan and the last payment was made by it on May 31, 2017. Hence, the present IB petition is found to be filed well within limitation and maintainable. Application admitted - moratorium declared.
Issues Involved:
1. Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 2. Verification of debt and default. 3. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). 4. Declaration of moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 5. Compliance with procedural requirements and legal obligations. Detailed Analysis: 1. Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: The Union Bank of India, as the petitioner, filed the petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Rule 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016, for initiating the CIRP against M/s. Greendiamz Biotech Ltd., the corporate debtor. The petition outlined the financial debt and the default by the corporate debtor. 2. Verification of Debt and Default: The petitioner provided detailed particulars of the financial debt, including various loan facilities granted to the corporate debtor, totaling ?48,46,00,000, and the outstanding amount claimed to be in default as ?85,71,54,265.28 as of September 30, 2018. The corporate debtor did not categorically deny its debt liability but sought time for a one-time settlement proposal. The Tribunal examined the merits and found the debt and default to be well-established, satisfying the requirements under Section 3(11) and (12) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. 3. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP): The petitioner proposed Mr. Chandra Prakash Jain as the IRP, and his consent was annexed in the prescribed format. The Tribunal appointed Mr. Chandra Prakash Jain as the IRP, confirming that no disciplinary proceedings were pending against him. 4. Declaration of Moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: The Tribunal declared a moratorium effective from May 27, 2020, which includes: - Prohibiting the institution or continuation of suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor. - Prohibiting the transfer, encumbrance, alienation, or disposal of any assets of the corporate debtor. - Prohibiting any action to foreclose, recover, or enforce any security interest. - Ensuring the supply of essential goods or services to the corporate debtor is not terminated or suspended. 5. Compliance with Procedural Requirements and Legal Obligations: The Tribunal directed the IRP to make a public announcement of the CIRP and call for submissions of claims. The IRP is required to perform functions as per Sections 17, 18, 20, and 21 of the Code, and all personnel associated with the corporate debtor are legally obligated to assist the IRP. The Tribunal emphasized the IRP's duty to protect and preserve the value of the corporate debtor's property and manage its operations as a going concern. Conclusion: The Tribunal admitted the petition for initiating the CIRP against M/s. Greendiamz Biotech Ltd., appointed Mr. Chandra Prakash Jain as the IRP, and declared a moratorium under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The commencement of the CIRP was effective from the date of the order.
|