2016 (12) TMI 1881 - HC - Companies Law

Assignment of debts - petitioner submits that the said deed was not taken into consideration in the earlier proceeding as the said deed was not registered and having regard to the fact that the said deed is registered, there cannot be any impediment to pray for the reliefs claimed in the petition - HELD THAT - The prayers as made in the petition cannot affect right of any of the parties since admittedly it appears that at least one of the secured creditors has assigned the debt in favour of the petitioner. The purpose is to formulate a scheme which could be acceptable to all the creditors and would be beneficial for all. The petitioner shall hold separate meetings of the secured and unsecured creditors including debenture holders, if any, after publishing advertisements once in the English daily The Times of India , once in the Bengali daily Aajkal and once in the Hindi daily Dainik Vishwamitra . Mr. Sondwip Mukherjee, Advocate, Bar Library Club, is appointed as the Chairperson of the meeting of all the creditors at an initial remuneration of 4000 GMs. to be paid by the petitioner. The notice of publication and other details shall be settled by the Chairperson. There shall be an order in terms of prayer (f) of the petition. The matter is made returnable on 30th January 2017. The interest of the unsecured creditors is not going to be affected in the event a meeting is called of all classes of creditors. However, a copy of the petition has been made over to Ms. Agarwal in court today.

Summary

Issues: Assignment of debt, validity of deed of assignment, formulation of a rehabilitation scheme, separate meetings of secured and unsecured creditors, appointment of Chairperson for creditor meetings, publication of meeting notices.

In this judgment by the High Court of Calcutta, the petitioner, an assignee from Allahabad Bank, sought meetings of secured creditors to formulate a rehabilitation scheme for the company based on a deed of assignment dated 5th November 2008, registered on 14th September 2015. The unsecured creditors, represented by Ms. Manju Agarwalla, alleged that the deed was forged, citing a previous failed attempt by the petitioner to establish a claim based on an unenforceable deed of assignment. However, the petitioner's counsel, Mr. Jishnu Chowdhury, argued that the newly registered deed should be considered for the reliefs claimed in the petition.

The Hon'ble Justice Soumen Sen noted that the prayers in the petition aimed to benefit all parties involved, especially since at least one secured creditor had assigned the debt to the petitioner. Therefore, the court directed the petitioner to hold separate meetings of secured and unsecured creditors, including debenture holders, by publishing advertisements in prominent newspapers like "The Times of India," "Aajkal," and "Dainik Vishwamitra." Additionally, Mr. Sondwip Mukherjee was appointed as the Chairperson for the creditor meetings, with an initial remuneration of 4000 GMs to be paid by the petitioner, and details of publication and meeting arrangements were entrusted to the Chairperson.

Furthermore, the court mandated a 21-day notice period for each class of creditors before the meetings, ensuring transparency and opportunity for all parties to participate. Ms. Manju Agarwalla was granted time to file an affidavit, emphasizing the court's commitment to safeguard the interests of unsecured creditors during the formulation of the rehabilitation scheme. The judgment set the matter to be returnable on 30th January 2017, maintaining a fair and structured approach to address the complexities of creditor rights and debt assignment in the context of company rehabilitation.