9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (12) TMI 35 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - expiry of 10 days from the date of service of the demand notice, neither the Corporate Debtor disputed the debt nor paid the due amount to the Operational Creditor - non-appearance of Corporate Debtor inspite of sending repeated intimations - HELD THAT - In the absence of Corporate Debtor, we have relied on Section 5 (20) and (21) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 to satisfy that the definition of Operational Creditor and Operational Debt. Further we relied on Section 9 (3) (a) (b) (c) of the Code to determine whether process for initiation of CIRP was followed by the Operational Creditor or not. On verification of records, it is noted that the claim amount in this application is ₹ 25,24,067/- and the cause of action arose before March 2020. Therefore, in all counts the instant Application deserves to be Admitted. This Tribunal is of the view that the present application is complete and the Applicant is entitled to claim its dues, which remain unpaid by the Corporate Debtor. Application admitted - moratorium declared.
Issues Involved:
Application under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for unpaid dues against a Corporate Debtor. Analysis: 1. Background and Claim: The Operational Creditor filed an application under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, seeking recovery of unpaid dues from the Corporate Debtor. The Operational Creditor was appointed as a Super Stockiest of the Corporate Debtor, but the agreement was terminated, leading to a claim of ?25,24,067. The Corporate Debtor admitted the liability through email communications and issued post-dated cheques, which were later dishonored. 2. Legal Notices and Demand: The Operational Creditor issued a legal notice under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and a statutory notice under Section 8 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, demanding payment of the outstanding amount. Despite the notices, the Corporate Debtor failed to respond or make the payment within the stipulated time frame, indicating an inability to pay its debts. 3. Procedural Compliance: The Tribunal examined the compliance with the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, particularly focusing on the definitions of Operational Creditor, Operational Debt, and the process for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under Section 9(3)(a)(b)(c) of the Code. The claim amount and the cause of action were verified to confirm the admissibility of the application. 4. Admission of Application: Considering the facts presented and the documents submitted by the Operational Creditor, the Tribunal found the application complete and admitted it under Section 9(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Consequently, a moratorium was declared on the Corporate Debtor, restricting various actions against it, and an Interim Resolution Professional was appointed to oversee the resolution process. 5. Moratorium and Resolution Process: The moratorium imposed on the Corporate Debtor included restrictions on legal actions, asset disposal, security enforcement, and property recovery. It was directed that services to the Corporate Debtor should not be terminated during the moratorium period, except for notified transactions. The moratorium would remain in effect until the completion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process or until liquidation is ordered. 6. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional: As the Operational Creditor did not suggest a name, the Tribunal appointed an Interim Resolution Professional to manage the resolution process. The appointed professional was directed to comply with the IBBI Regulations and submit the necessary Authorization for Assignment within the specified timeframe. 7. Communication and Compliance: The Registry was instructed to communicate the order to all relevant parties, including the Operational Creditor, the Corporate Debtor, and the Interim Resolution Professional, to ensure compliance with the directives issued by the Tribunal. In conclusion, the Tribunal admitted the application, imposed a moratorium on the Corporate Debtor, appointed an Interim Resolution Professional, and directed compliance with the relevant regulations to facilitate the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process effectively.
|
