9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 50 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Financial Creditors - existence of debt and dispute or not - HELD THAT - The default has occurred in repayment of the financial debt as on 13.10.2018 and no representation has been made by the Corporate Debtor. It is satisfying that in the present petition financial debt is due and payable - The Petition is filed in the proforma prescribed under Rule 4 (2) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016 read with Section 7 of the Code and is complete. A default has occurred, and debt has remained unpaid. Accordingly, the application is admitted and CIRP is ordered to be initiated against the CD. Petition admitted - moratorium declared.
Issues:
1. Application under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). 2. Default in repayment of loan by the Corporate Debtor. 3. Extension of limitation period as per Supreme Court order. 4. Adjudication of the application and appointment of Interim Resolution Professional (IRP). 5. Direction for public announcement and moratorium period initiation. 6. Direction for deposit of funds by the Financial Creditor. Analysis: 1. The application was filed by the financial Creditor to initiate CIRP against the Corporate Debtor under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The loan amount disbursed was not repaid, leading to default. 2. Despite multiple reminders and demand notices, the Corporate Debtor failed to repay the outstanding amount, resulting in a default of Rs. 1,47,44,73,067.90 as of 08.01.2021. The date of default was determined as 13.10.2018. 3. The limitation period for the application was extended as per a Supreme Court order, excluding the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 for calculating limitation. This extension allowed the application to be within the limitation period. 4. The Adjudicating Authority, after hearing the submissions and reviewing the documents, found that a default had occurred, and the debt remained unpaid. Following the precedent set by the Supreme Court, the application was admitted, and CIRP was initiated against the Corporate Debtor. An Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) was appointed as per the requirements. 5. The IRP was directed to make a public announcement immediately regarding the admission of the application under Section 7 of the Code. The moratorium period was initiated as per Section 14(1) of the Code, with relevant provisions coming into force during this period. 6. The Financial Creditor was directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs with the IRP to cover expenses related to the insolvency resolution process. This amount would be subject to adjustment by the Committee of Creditors and refunded to the applicant as necessary. The registry was instructed to communicate the order to all relevant parties promptly. This detailed analysis covers the key issues addressed in the judgment, outlining the legal proceedings and decisions made by the Tribunal in the context of the insolvency and bankruptcy matter presented before it.
|
