2018 (4) TMI 1922 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Maintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Operational Creditors - existence of debt and dispute or not - HELD THAT - By perusal of the record of present petition goes to shows that the Operational Creditor duly issued a statutory demand notice under section-8 by providing supporting documents to prove supply of goods and materials by describing the details of the unpaid amount against goods duly received by the Corporate Debtor Company. These documents includes tax invoices/ Credit memos issued during the year, 2015 for total outstanding dues of Rs. 2,33,278/- which is evident that the Corporate Debtor company has committed default - Since, the Corporate Debtor has failed to make reply to the demand notice. Therefore, it amounts to admission of debts. On perusal of the record the filing of present petition is found to be in order. It meets statutory requirement of section-8 and 9 of the Code, hence, it is found complete and deserve for admission. Petition admitted - moratorium declared.

Summary

Issues:
- Application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.
- Admission of debts by the Corporate Debtor.
- Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional.
- Order of moratorium under Section 13(1)(a) of the IB Code.

Analysis:
1. The petition was filed under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 to initiate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor, Maruti Koatsu Cylinders Limited. The Operational Creditor sought to trigger the insolvency process due to unpaid debts amounting to Rs. 2,33,278/- plus interest at 20% per annum.

2. The CEO of the Corporate Debtor admitted the outstanding amount of Rs. 2,33,278/- and expressed no objection to the initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The Operational Creditor had issued a statutory demand notice under section-8, providing supporting documents to establish the default by the Corporate Debtor.

3. The Tribunal found the filing of the petition in order, meeting the statutory requirements of the Code. As the Corporate Debtor failed to respond to the demand notice, it was deemed an admission of debts. Consequently, the petition was admitted for the commencement of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor.

4. An Interim Resolution Professional was appointed by the Adjudicating Authority to manage the resolution process. The appointed professional was directed to cause a public announcement of the initiation of the process and call for submission of claims as per the regulations.

5. A moratorium was ordered under Section 13(1)(a) of the IB Code, prohibiting various actions against the Corporate Debtor, including instituting suits, transferring assets, and enforcing security interests. Essential goods and services supply to the Corporate Debtor were to remain uninterrupted during the moratorium period, subject to certain exceptions notified by the Central Government.

6. The order of moratorium was to be in force from the date of the order until the completion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The petition was disposed of with no order as to costs, and the order was to be communicated to all relevant parties involved in the proceedings.