9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 914 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcySeeking winding up of the Respondent/Corporate Debtor - Section 433(e) and Section 433(f) r/w. Section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 - HELD THAT - It is seen from the records that already a Settlement Agreement was entered into between the parties on 25.07.2017 in and by which the Corporate Debtor is liable to pay a sum of 65,000,000 JPY on or before September 2018. There is no dispute in relation to the same. However, it is seen from the record of proceedings that the Corporate Debtor has violated the terms of the said settlement Agreement and seeking time to settle the matter. Hence, the 'debt' and 'default' on the part of the Corporate Debtor is proved beyond reasonable doubt and under the said circumstances, there are no other option available, than to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process as against the Corporate Debtor. Since the present Petition is admitted, the restraining order passed against the property situated Arcot Road, comprised in T.S. No. 5/11, stands intact. Application admitted - moratorium declared.
Issues:
1. Breach of settlement agreement and default in repayment by the Corporate Debtor. 2. Contempt petition filed by Operational Creditor against Corporate Debtor. 3. Application filed by Corporate Debtor seeking relief from attachment order. 4. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Analysis: 1. The Petitioner, an Operational Creditor, filed a Winding up Petition under the Companies Act, 1956, seeking winding up of the Respondent, a Corporate Debtor. After the introduction of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, the matter was transferred to the Tribunal. A Settlement Agreement was reached between the parties, but the Corporate Debtor failed to adhere to the payment terms, leading to the revival of the petition and initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor. 2. The Operational Creditor filed a petition under Section 245 of the Companies Act, 2013 for contempt against the Corporate Debtor for breaching the Settlement Agreement. The Tribunal found the breach established and initiated Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor. 3. The Corporate Debtor filed an application seeking relief from an attachment order over a property. The Tribunal dismissed the application and maintained the restraining order on the property, directing the Resolution Professional to take necessary steps during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. 4. The Tribunal appointed an Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) to oversee the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The IRP was directed to manage the affairs of the Corporate Debtor, call for creditor claims, and conduct the resolution process in accordance with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. The Tribunal ordered a moratorium on certain actions against the Corporate Debtor and directed the Operational Creditor to pay initial expenses to the IRP. The IRP was instructed to file progress reports within specified timelines. This comprehensive analysis covers the breach of settlement agreement, contempt petition, relief sought by the Corporate Debtor, and the appointment of an IRP for the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process as per the judgment of the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench.
|
