9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 965X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he purposes of the Code has been upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court in SWISS RIBBONS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [ 2019 (1) TMI 1508 - SUPREME COURT ]. Petition is revived and restored to file. - MA No.3601MB.II/2019 in CP (IB) No.389/MB.II/2019 - - - Dated:- 16-10-2020 - Mr Rajasekhar V.K. : Member (Judicial) And Mr Ravikumar Duraisamy : Member (Technical) For the Applicant/Financial Creditor : Mr Shyam Kapadia a/w Suvaaankoor Das i/b K-Law, Advocates. For the Respondent/Corporate Debtor: Mr Murtaza Somjee a/w Ms Vatsala Khandelwal i/b Jerome Merchants Partners, Advocates. ORDER Per: Rajasekhar V.K., Member (Judicial) 1. This is an application filed by the original Financial Credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Second Party and the Confirming Party have been unable to make repayments under the Financing Arrangement and the Second Party (Himadri Foods Limited) as corporate guarantor is liable to make payments to the First Party under the corporate guarantee; b. A total amount of USD 539,280/₹ 3,77,49,599/- is currently outstanding as on date of execution of the Deed of Settlement and the same is due and payable to the First Party by the Second Party. (3) Payment Obligations: That in full settlement of the dispute between the parties, the Second Party has unconditionally agreed to make payment or arrange for making payment of the Total Outstanding Amount to the First Party in stages (i) an upfront payment of ₹ 30,00,000/-; (ii ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt: that the Code and the order do not provide for revival or restoration of a company petition which has already been disposed of. The Code envisages only three situations admission, dismissal or withdrawal of a company petition before admission. However, once withdrawn, the Financial Creditor at best has the ability to make a fresh application under the Code, and such application would be subject to fresh adjudication and the debtor shall be entitled to oppose such an application. Therefore, the Respondent has prayed for dismissal of the present Application as legally unfounded and procedurally unsound. Arguments of Mr Shyam Kapadia, learned counsel for the Applicant/ Financial Creditor 7. Mr Shyam Kapadia, learned counsel for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Corporate Debtor, reiterated the stand taken by the Respondent/ Corporate Debtor in its affidavit in reply, and stated that there is no provision under the Code for revival of a company petition that has already been disposed of. 11. Mr Murtaza Somjee drew our attention to the order dated 15.02.2018 passed by the Mumbai Bench (Court No.1) in MA No.601/2017 in CP (IB) No.1097/2017, wherein the restoration application was dismissed making it clear that that no procedure for restoration of the Company Petition was available under the Code or Rules thereto. That order gave liberty to the petitioner therein to file a fresh Company Petition if he was so entitled to do. 12. Mr Murtaza Somjee also placed on record the order dated 13.07.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
