Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2022 (8) TMI Tri This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2022 (8) TMI 996 - Tri - Insolvency and Bankruptcy


Issues Involved:
1. Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP)
2. Limitation Period and Acknowledgment of Debt
3. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP)
4. Declaration of Moratorium

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP):
The application was filed by the Bank of Baroda on 14.02.2020 to initiate CIRP against M/s. MB Malls Pvt. Ltd. under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code) for a default amount of Rs. 43,41,25,983.25. The financial debt and default were established through loan agreements and subsequent defaults by the Corporate Debtor, which were acknowledged by the Corporate Debtor in their balance sheets and other documents. The Tribunal admitted the petition and initiated CIRP based on the substantiated claim of default.

2. Limitation Period and Acknowledgment of Debt:
The Respondent contended that the petition was barred by the law of limitation, citing the default date as 29.10.2012 and arguing that the application was filed beyond the three-year limitation period. However, the Applicant provided balance sheets for the financial years ending 31.03.2017, 31.03.2018, and 31.03.2019, which reflected the acknowledgment of debt. The Tribunal referenced the Supreme Court judgment in Dena Bank vs. C. Shivakumar Reddy, which held that entries in balance sheets amount to acknowledgment of debt under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. Thus, the limitation period commenced from 31.03.2019, making the application filed on 14.02.2020 within the permissible period.

3. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP):
The Financial Creditor proposed Mr. Vikram Bajaj as the IRP, who consented to the appointment and provided necessary disclosures and declarations, including no pending disciplinary proceedings against him. The Tribunal found that the requirements under Section 7(3)(b) of the Code were satisfied, and Mr. Bajaj was appointed as the IRP.

4. Declaration of Moratorium:
The Tribunal declared a moratorium under Section 14 of the Code, which imposed prohibitions on:
- Institution or continuation of suits or proceedings against the Corporate Debtor.
- Transferring, encumbering, alienating, or disposing of assets by the Corporate Debtor.
- Actions to foreclose, recover, or enforce any security interest.
- Recovery of property by an owner or lessor from the Corporate Debtor.
The moratorium does not apply to transactions notified by the Central Government or the supply of essential goods or services to the Corporate Debtor, nor to the surety in a contract of guarantee to the Corporate Debtor.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal concluded that the application was complete and the Financial Creditor was entitled to claim the outstanding debt. The CIRP was initiated, and the IRP was directed to perform his functions as per the Code, with a report to be filed within 30 days.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates