9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 575X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t on record a Tabular Chart and audited statement to show that the Corporate Applicant was solvent and self-sustained Company and immediately before the petition was filed, the Appellant serially siphoned off money. In support of it a Tabular Chart has been enclosed - However, we are not inclined to give any finding on the question of fact as to whether the Appellant is a solvent Company and any amount is siphoned or not. If that be so, it will be open to the parties to move on the aforesaid facts before the Registrar of Companies and Regional Director of the Companies, Eastern Region with such allegations. The stand as taken by the parties, suggest that the application under Section 10 of the I B Code was filed by the Corporate Applicant fraudulently with malicious intent and not for Resolution or Liquidation and may attract Section 65 of the I B Code for penal action. However, as no such order has been passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal) under Section 65 imposing penalty, we are not passing any penal order under Section 65 - the application under Section 10 was not maintainable. Appeal dismissed. - Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ₹ 544,00,00,000/- and the amount in default is ₹ 536,92,00,000/- as per the list of financial creditors provided as Annexure A-5. The list of Operational Creditors along with their respective amounts outstanding as shown in Annexure A-16 (though disputed) is given as follows: - Sl. No. Name of the Operational Creditor Date Amount Outstanding (Rs.) Submission by the Corporate Debtor 01 Sleepwell Industries Co. Ld. 30/08/2013 a) 3,94,78,064/- SLP has been filed by the Corporate Debtor challenging the rejection of the application u/s. 48 of the Arbitration b) 80,64,083/- Conciliation Act, 1996 before the Calcutta High Court. Application u/s. 48 of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996, disputing the amount claimed, has been filed before the Calcutta High Court by the Corporate Debtor. 02 Swiss Singapore Overseas Enterprises Pte. Ltd. 20/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Annexure A- 14) which ordered the Company to pay ₹ 15,60,22,736/- and stayed the balance demand of IT Authorities. IT Authorities exercising its powers u/s. 220(3) of the IT Act, 1961, also attached various bank accounts of the Corporate Debtor and issued the attachment orders upon various banks (Annexure A-15) Total Rs. 256,01,92,031/- (approximately) 4. The Sleepwell Industries Company Limited (Respondent No.11), an Unsecured Creditor objected on the ground that the application under Section 10 was filed to defraud its creditors and to frustrate the orders passed by the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in SLP (C) No.540 of 2018 dated 20th April, 2018. It is alleged that for non-payment of value of goods an Arbitral Award was passed, for which two Execution Applications were filed against LMJ International Ltd. (Now known as Sri Munisuvrata Agri International Ltd.). By order dated 4th December, 2014, a composite order was passed by the Hon ble High Court of Calcutta ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ensure that Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process is initiated against itself without informing them. 7. Two Shareholders of the Corporate Applicant (Appellant) also moved applications opposing the initiation. They have submitted that initially, the shareholders in the Company, being members of the Jain family were carrying on their business jointly. However, due to subsequent differences, the dispute was referred to the Arbitral Tribunal, which passed Award upon consent of the parties on 3rd January, 2013. The aforesaid Shareholders/ Applicants being the Party of the First Part have complied with their obligation under the Award, but the Other Part , which was to be complied by the MLJ Group (Main Group Corporate Debtor) had defaulted in complying with their part of obligation. Therefore, an Execution Application being EC No.873 of 2015 was filed before the Calcutta High Court for seeking enforcement of the said Award, wherein, inter alia, an interim Award was passed on 4th March, 2015. Further, according to the aforesaid Shareholders/ Applicants, one of the Companies of the Jain family namely LMJ Project Pvt. Ltd. has been allotted to the aforesaid Shareholders/ App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ta 700069, while other Companies are still running from LMJ House. It is further stated that immediately after change of Registered office on 26th April, 2018, the application under Section 10 was filed before the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), Kolkata Bench on next day, i.e., 27th April, 2018. 13. This Appellate Tribunal asked the Appellant, whether the Shareholders of the Corporate Applicant had taken decision in its Extra Ordinary General Meeting to move an application under Section 10 of the I B Code. Pursuant to such query, the Appellant enclosed a document to show that Shareholders permission were taken on 10th April, 2018. The aforesaid document was not brought on record by the Corporate Applicant before the Adjudicating Authority. The 02nd Extraordinary General Meeting of the Corporate Applicant shown to be held in the Registered Office of the Company on 10th April, 2018 at 15-B, Hemanta Basu Sarani, 5th Floor, Kolkata and the Minutes were signed by the Chairman on 16th April, 2018. The Respondents have shown irregularity in the document and stated that the aforesaid document is a forged document, which is subsequently manufactured and b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
