2022 (2) TMI 146 - AT - Insolvency and Bankruptcy

Admissibility of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Financial Creditors - It is submitted that efforts were made for settlement in the year 2010-2019 but no settlement could be arrived at - time limitation - validity of assignment agreement - HELD THAT - The only interim order granted by the High Court was that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner till the next listing. The said order cannot be read to mean that assignment in favour of the Respondent was stayed by the High Court. Thus, there are no illegality in filing Application by Respondent No.1 under Section 7. Thus, the said submission does not help the Appellant. Second submission is that objections were raised by the Appellant regarding question of limitation in pursuance of the liberty granted by the Hon ble Supreme Court on 08.11.2019 which has not been considered on merits by the Adjudicating Authority - HELD THAT - The Appeal was dismissed by the Hon ble Supreme Court affirming the judgment of this Appellate Tribunal meaning thereby the view of the Appellate Tribunal that Application is not barred by time was upheld. The fact that liberty was granted to raise certain objections by the Appellant cannot be read to mean that Appellant was permitted to re-agitate the question of limitation again before the Adjudicating Authority which had become final - there are no substance in the submission that objection of limitation could have been raised by the Appellant before the Adjudicating Authority. The question of limitation has become final between the parties since judgment of this Appellate Tribunal was affirmed by the Hon ble Supreme Court. Efforts made by the Appellant for settlement with the Bank - HELD THAT - It is always open for the Appellant to settle the matter and file an appropriate Application under Section 12A before the Adjudicating Authority, who if satisfies, can always consider the Application and pass appropriate order. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against the order admitting the petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
- Challenge regarding the assignment basis of the application.
- Objections raised by the Appellant on the question of limitation.
- Efforts made by the Appellant for settlement with the Bank.

Analysis:
The judgment revolves around an appeal filed against the order admitting a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Appellant challenged the basis of the application, arguing that the assignment in favor of the Respondent was under challenge in a High Court writ petition. However, the High Court's interim order did not stay the assignment, allowing the Respondent to file the application under Section 7. The submission regarding the challenge to the assignment was deemed unsubstantiated.

Regarding the objections raised by the Appellant on the question of limitation, it was noted that the Appellate Tribunal had previously allowed the Respondent's application, ruling that it was not time-barred. The Honorable Supreme Court affirmed this decision, dismissing the appeal and upholding the view that the application was not barred by time. The finality of this decision precluded the Appellant from re-agitating the question of limitation before the Adjudicating Authority.

Furthermore, the Appellant's efforts to settle the matter with the Bank were acknowledged, with the Tribunal highlighting that the Appellant could still pursue settlement by filing an appropriate application under Section 12A before the Adjudicating Authority. The Tribunal found no merit in the appeal and subsequently dismissed it, affirming the decision to admit the petition under Section 7.