9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 653 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Financial Creditors - Existence of debt and default or not - time limitation - HELD THAT - In the present case, the occurrence of default is evidenced by the details furnished by the Petitioner including the record of financial information (Form-C) issued by NESL in respect of the debt of the Corporate Debtor. Time Limitation - HELD THAT - The transaction involving the defaulted amount dates back to 03.03.2019 (as shown as Annexure B-31) and the application was filed on 28.09.2021. Hence, the Petition has been filed within the period of limitation. The respondent corporate debtor in his reply, admitted the debt and default - The application filed in the prescribed Form No. 1 is found to be complete. Application admitted - moratorium declared.
Issues involved:
1. Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. 2. Default amount and financial debt against the Corporate Debtor. 3. Completion of project and financial constraints faced by the Corporate Debtor. 4. Admittance of debt and default by the Corporate Debtor. 5. Filing of the application within the limitation period. 6. Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional and constitution of Committee of Creditors. Issue 1: Initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: The petition was filed under Section 7 of the IBC by Financial Creditors against the Corporate Debtor for default amounting to Rs. 7,48,37,351/-. The Corporate Debtor, a real estate developer, failed to complete construction activities in the LGCL ONE STREET project, leading to financial creditors' grievance. Issue 2: Default amount and financial debt against the Corporate Debtor: Financial creditors reported a default amount of Rs. 7,48,37,351/- to the information utility, which was authenticated. Despite multiple attempts to contact the Corporate Debtor, there was no response, indicating a lack of intention to honor agreements for sale and construction, resulting in the initiation of the insolvency resolution process. Issue 3: Completion of project and financial constraints faced by the Corporate Debtor: The Corporate Debtor cited financial constraints and inability to complete the LGCL ONE STREET project on time. The project faced a standstill in construction activities, causing financial creditors to lose faith in the Corporate Debtor's commitments. Issue 4: Admittance of debt and default by the Corporate Debtor: In response to the application, the Corporate Debtor admitted to the debt and default, acknowledging the financial challenges faced by the company, including consistent financial losses. Issue 5: Filing of the application within the limitation period: The petition was filed within the limitation period, considering the transaction date and the filing date, ensuring compliance with the legal requirements for initiating the insolvency resolution process. Issue 6: Appointment of Interim Resolution Professional and constitution of Committee of Creditors: An Interim Resolution Professional was appointed, and the Committee of Creditors was directed to be constituted within a specified timeframe. The IRP was tasked with fulfilling obligations under various sections of the IBC and providing progress reports to the Tribunal regularly. This detailed analysis covers the key issues addressed in the judgment, outlining the legal proceedings and decisions made by the National Company Law Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench, in the matter of initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against the Corporate Debtor.
|
