9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 917 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Operational Creditors - existence of debt and dispute or not - HELD THAT - It is noted that the Corporate Debtor has taken the building for lease and had defaulted in paying the rents as per the agreement entered between them - a demand notice was issued to the Corporate Debtor and the same was delivered to the registered office of Corporate Debtor and Corporate Debtor has come up for clearing dues and underwent an MOU, but failed to pay the debt in spite of receipt of demand notice and no dispute was raised - the Adjudicating Authority directed the operational creditor to issue notice to the corporate debtor on 16.02.2022 and 01.03.2022. The notice which was sent to the respondent got returned twice with endorsement Addressee Refused . Thus this Adjudicating Authority set the Corporate Debtor ex-parte vide order dated 30.03.2022. The claim amount is more than Rs. One Lakh and the Petition is filed before the notification dated 24.03.2020, hence, it is clear that the company petition is admissible. Petition admitted - moratorium declared.
Issues involved: Petition under Section 9 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for default of Rs. 1,78,96,315 by Corporate Debtor, seeking admission of the Petition, commencement of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, granting moratorium, and appointment of Interim Resolution Professional.
Analysis: 1. Averments: The Operational Creditor filed a petition stating that the Corporate Debtor defaulted on rental payments as per the Lease Agreement, despite several reminders and notices for payment. The Corporate Debtor failed to repay the outstanding dues, leading to the issuance of demand notices and termination notice. An MOU was entered into, but the Corporate Debtor breached the terms by defaulting on payment again. The Operational Creditor issued another demand notice under the IBC for the unpaid operational debt, which the Corporate Debtor failed to repay within the statutory period of 10 days without raising any dispute. 2. Findings: The Tribunal noted that the Corporate Debtor had defaulted on rent payments as per the lease agreement and failed to clear the dues even after receiving demand notices and entering into an MOU. The Adjudicating Authority directed the Operational Creditor to issue notices to the Corporate Debtor, which were returned twice with "Addressee Refused" endorsement, leading to the Corporate Debtor being set ex-parte. The claim amount being more than Rs. One Lakh and the petition filed before the notification dated 24.03.2020, made the company petition admissible. 3. Decision: The Tribunal admitted the Petition under Section 9 of IBC, 2016, declaring a moratorium and issuing various directions, including prohibiting suits or proceedings against the Corporate Debtor, ensuring the supply of essential goods or services, and specifying the effect of the moratorium until the completion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The Tribunal appointed an Interim Resolution Professional and directed the Registry to inform the Registrar of Companies about the Corporate Debtor's status under CIRP. The Operational Creditor was directed to pay a sum to the Interim Resolution Professional for expenses, subject to adjustment by the Committee of Creditors. This detailed analysis of the judgment outlines the issues, the contentions of the parties, the findings of the Tribunal, and the final decision rendered in the matter.
|
