2020 (10) TMI 483 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Maintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - existence of debt and dispute or not - HELD THAT - This is a matter where the Operational Creditor has chosen to move this Adjudicating Authority after accepting the Letter of Intent for Allotment of the two plots of land. It is the case of the Operational Creditor that it does not know when it is likely to take possession of the said plots in view of the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. That by itself cannot be a reason to move this Adjudicating Authority. Moreover, the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court make it clear that there cannot be any alienation of movable or immovable property in the light of the order dated 21.11.2013 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Petition rejected.

Summary

Issues:
Company Petition under section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Jurisdiction of the Bench:
The Corporate Debtor, a public company, was incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, with its registered office in Maharashtra. The petition was filed before the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, seeking initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor.

2. Default and Debt Amount:
The Operational Creditor filed the petition based on the Corporate Debtor's failure to pay a principal amount of ?7,11,76,227.00 and interest of ?2,66,92,698.51 as on the date of default. The total debt due was ?9,78,68,925.51, supported by invoices and bank statements.

3. Operational Creditor's Claims:
The Operational Creditor provided housekeeping services to the Corporate Debtor under a contract and raised fifty-nine invoices payable within thirty days, including interest for delayed payments. A demand notice was served, and the Corporate Debtor acknowledged the debt in a letter.

4. Corporate Debtor's Defence:
The Corporate Debtor, part of the Sahara group, claimed that the outstanding invoices were set off against land allotment in 2015. It argued that the invoices were for a different company within the group, and various orders of the Supreme Court restrained any payments or alienation of assets.

5. Adjudication and Decision:
After hearing arguments, the Tribunal noted the admission of liability by the Corporate Debtor but considered the restrictions imposed by Supreme Court orders. The Operational Creditor's reliance on a previous NCLAT order was deemed insufficient. The Tribunal rejected the petition, citing the Supreme Court's orders prohibiting alienation of property.

6. Conclusion and Communication:
The Tribunal clarified that the dismissal of the petition did not prejudice the petitioner's rights in other forums. The order was communicated to the parties in compliance with the provisions of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code.

This detailed analysis covers the jurisdiction, debt details, claims, defences, adjudication process, decision, and communication aspects of the legal judgment concerning the Company Petition for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process.