9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1749X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of receipt of the hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment. The RP and CoC had also fixed cut-off date/ deadline for filing such information/claims before it. Since the record of other pending CIRP proceedings in relating to M/s. KSS Patrons P. Ltd., is not made available in the present case, neither it can be ascertained nor appropriate for this Adjudicating Authority to decide such issue without going through the relevant record whether the resolution applicant falls within the category of a related party or otherwise to the corporate debtor of such CIRP proceedings or hit by section 29A of the Code - Moreover, even if, the resolution applicant is found to have not paid off its NPAs, then the CoC is legally required to follow the prescribed procedure under the proviso of section 30(4) of the IB Code before declaring the resolution applicant is ineligible under section 29A of the Code. The present application are not tenable at this stage in such the time-bound proceeding and the hearing wherein has already been concluded - application dismissed. - I. A. Nos. 56 and 57 of 2019 in C. P. (I. B.) Nos. 39 and 40/7/NCLT/AHM/ 2017. - - - Dated:- 7-3-2019 - Harihar Prakas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that M/s. KSS Patron P. Ltd., executed all necessary documents and necessary agreements for availing such loan facilities and provided a corporate guarantee. 6. However, during the course of business, M/s. KSS Patrons Engineering and Construction Ltd., defaulted in repayment of loans and failed to regularize the accounts. Thereafter, the applicant issued a recall notice to the said company on March 22, 2018 and the applicant further declared the accounts of M/s. Patron Engineering and Constructions Ltd., as non-performing asset ( NPA ) and demanded repayment of ₹ 34,39,191.82. 7. It is a case of the applicant that it came to know that above stated defaulter company further filed a corporate insolvency resolution process under section 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code before the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, which has been admitted. Therefore, the applicant filed form C before CIRP of the above stated company on April 25, 2018 and further filed another form C on October 19, 2018 in respect of CIRP of M/s. KSS Patron P. Ltd., which was filed pursuant to an order dated October 4, 2018 passed by the hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of ArcelorM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application is liable to be rejected. 12. In support of its contentions, the CoC has emphasized this facts that under the mandate of the hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the above stated matter, the resolution applicant was required to clear over due amount in respect of Uttam Galva Steel Ltd., and KSS Patron P. Ltd., latest by October 18, 2018 while the present applicant-bank filed its claim with the RP of M/s. KSS Patron P. Ltd., only on October 19, 2018, i. e., after the expiry of mandatory period provided under the Supreme Court's judgment for clearance of overdue amount. Therefore, in such a situation no infirmity can be attributed on the present process being under taken by the CoC under the strict mandate of the hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment. Further, it is submitted that the judgment of the hon'ble Supreme Court did not impose any obligation upon the resolution applicant M/s. ArcelorMittal to pay any amount in respect of claim which is filed after October 19, 2018. 13. Hence, on the basis of above stated reasons, the present application is liable to be dismissed. 14. It is further submitted that ArcelorMittal, the resolution applicant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on October 4, 2018 wherein, their Lordships have pleased to hold and observe as follows (page 480) : Since it is clear that both sets of resolution plans that were sub mitted to the resolution professional, even on April 2, 2018, are hit by section 29A(c), and since the proviso to section 29A(c) will not apply as the corporate debtors related to AMIPL and Numetal have not paid off their respective NPAs, ordinarily, these appeals would have been disposed of by merely declaring both resolution applicants to be ineligible under section 29A(c). Shri Subramanium, on behalf of the committee of creditors, requested us to give one more opportunity to the parties before us to pay off their corporate debtors' respective debts in accordance with section 29A, as the best resolution plan can then be selected by the requisite majority of the committee of creditors, so that all dues could be cleared as soon as possible. Acceding to this request, in order to do complete justice under article 142 of the Constitution of India, and also for the reason that the law on section 29A has been laid down for the first time by this judgment, we give one more opportunity to both the resolution applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to Mr. Satish Kumar Gupta, RP only on October 19, 2018 and November 1, 2018 by informing that debts of ₹ 3,43,96,866 crores are not paid by the corporate debtor, M/s. KSS Patron P. Ltd., to which, the present resolution applicant is stated to be a guarantor, thus is related party. 25. The applicant's such communication is evident of such undisputed position in the matter that when the CoC was considering the resolution plan, such claim was not lodged at all in an appropriate and prescribed manner with the RP of the present corporate debtor. Hence, if the RP and CoC did not find appropriate to declare the resolution applicant ineligible being hit under section 29A of the IB Code. Hence, for such decision, they cannot be found with fault. Because the resolution applicant has earlier made payment of its NPA account as pointed to it by the RP and CoC of the present corporate debtor. The resolution applicant also furnished necessary proof of payment so made to the present RP and CoC. 26. Since the record of other pending CIRP proceedings in relating to M/s. KSS Patrons P. Ltd., is not made available to us in the present case, neither it can be ascertained nor appropria ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce such prayer must fail. 31. Further, the present applicant has sought for a copy of the resolution plan in respect of present corporate debtor-company. However, in our view the applicant cannot be termed as financial creditor to the present corporate debtor, M/s. Essar Steel India Ltd. Hence, it is not entitled to claim a copy of the resolution plan nor its debts reach figures of 10 per cent. of the total payable debts of the present corporate debtor-company. Hence, such request cannot be acceded to. Therefore, on the above stated reasons, the present application must fail and is liable to be rejected. 32. Hence, on aforesaid grounds also these application fails and are liable to be rejected. 33. Notwithstanding above, it is made clear that the applicant-M/s. Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., is at liberty to pursue its claim and enforce recovery of debts with the corporate debtor, namely, M/s. KSS Patron P. Ltd., wherein also, a CIRP is going on as per its merits and as per the entitlement or in appropriate forum. Therefore, it is made clear that we have not dealt with or adjudicated the legality of the claim filed by M/s. Karur Vysya Bank Ltd., with M/s. KSS Patron P. Ltd. 34. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
