9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 1296 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its debt - existence of debt and dispute or not - HELD THAT - After hearing the counsel for the applicant and the admission in form of email from the CD with respect to the debt falling due the default is proved beyond doubt. The CD has neither replied nor appeared for defending the application and thus application deserves to be admitted - The registered office of corporate debtor is situated in New Delhi and therefore this Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain and try this application - The present application is not barred by limitation as the date of deault is 28.07.2017 as per part IV of Form 5 and application is filed on 28.09.2019. The applicant has filed an affidavit in compliance of Section 9(3)(b) stating no notice of dispute was raised from CD by the applicant. The applicant has attached the copy of bank statement in compliance with the requirement of Section 9(3)(c) of the IBC 2016. The present application is complete and the Applicant is entitled to claim its dues, establishing the default in payment of the operational debt beyond doubt, and fulfilment of requirements under section 9(5) of the Code. Hence, the present application is admitted - Moratorium declared.
Issues:
1. Application for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process 2. Default in payment by Corporate Debtor 3. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal 4. Barred by limitation or not 5. Compliance with requirements under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 6. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional 7. Deposit by Operational Creditor 8. Moratorium under Section 14(1) of IBC, 2016 1. Application for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process: The application was filed by M/S. Roofs and Ceilings (I) Pvt. Ltd. to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against M/S. Dugal Associates Pvt. Ltd. The applicant provided details of the business transactions, invoices raised, and the outstanding amount due from the Corporate Debtor. 2. Default in payment by Corporate Debtor: Despite repeated requests and a demand notice issued by the Operational Creditor, the Corporate Debtor failed to make the payment of the outstanding amount along with interest. The Corporate Debtor neither replied to the demand notice nor made any payment, leading to the filing of the application. 3. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal: The Tribunal established its jurisdiction to entertain and try the application as the registered office of the Corporate Debtor was situated in New Delhi, where the present application was filed. 4. Barred by limitation or not: The application was not barred by limitation as the default date was determined to be 28.07.2017, and the application was filed on 28.09.2019, falling within the statutory limitation period. 5. Compliance with requirements under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: The applicant fulfilled the requirements under Section 9(3)(b) by stating that no notice of dispute was raised by the Corporate Debtor. Additionally, the applicant provided a bank statement in compliance with Section 9(3)(c) of the IBC 2016. 6. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional: The Bench appointed Mr. Pradeep Upadhyay as the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) of the Corporate Debtor. The IRP was directed to take necessary steps as per the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 7. Deposit by Operational Creditor: The Operational Creditor was directed to deposit a sum of ?2 Lakh with the IRP to meet the expenses required for the resolution process. The amount deposited would be subject to adjustment by the Committee of Creditors and later refunded to the Operational Creditor. 8. Moratorium under Section 14(1) of IBC, 2016: As a consequence of the application being admitted, a moratorium was imposed under Section 14(1) of the IBC, 2016, prohibiting various actions against the Corporate Debtor. Essential supplies to the Corporate Debtor were to continue during the moratorium period, with specific exceptions outlined in the order. In conclusion, the Tribunal admitted the application for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, appointed an IRP, directed a deposit by the Operational Creditor, and imposed a moratorium to facilitate the resolution process.
|
