9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut any evidentiary document does not extend the limitation period, but any payment made by the debtor or any acknowledgment of the debt by the debtor in his books of account is a sufficient cause to extend the limitation period as per section 18 of the Limitation Act - In the present case payments have been made regularly even after the first date of default up until April, 2016 and this petition has been filed in February, 2019 making this petition well within the limitation period. This Adjudicating Authority, on perusal of the documents filed by the creditor, is of the view that the corporate debtor defaulted in repaying the loan availed - the existence of debt and default is reasonably established by the financial creditor as a major ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ranted to the corporate debtor vide sanction letter dated October 24, 2013. The said amount was also disbursed by them in favour of the corporate debtor. Counsel for the petitioner mentioned that there was deed of guarantee entered into dated October 29, 2013 and December 9, 2013. There were also registered mortgage deeds dated October 29, 2013, December 10, 2013 and December 16, 2013. 4. Counsel for the petitioner also submits that the date of default and that of declaration of NPA of the corporate debtor is December 31, 2014. The principal outstanding amount as on February 10, 2019 amounts to ₹ 40,58,23,360.8 whereas the interest is ₹ 34,81,43,071.74, penal interest is ₹ 5,30,37,157.27 and other legal expense etc. is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned that they had requested the petitioner vide their letter dated May 5, 2015 for issuance of conditional NOC in favour of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd., for release of collateral property, Flat No. 1701 admeasuring 5,450 sq.ft. in RNA Mirage, Worli, Mumbai which was not considered to be favourable by the petitioner and hence rejected vide letter dated July 28, 2015. 8. Further the corporate debtor has also annexed the notice dated July 27, 2015, sent to them by the petitioner wherein the demand for initiating the process for identification as wilful defaulter(s) as a last chance or else the right will be exercised by initiating proper proceeding. 9. Counsel for the corporate debtor contended that the power of attorney annexed by the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s directors. Against this action of the petitioner, the corporate debtor had filed Securitisation Application No. 91 of 2016 before the Debts Recovery Tribunal and in fact thereafter the corporate debtor had made payments towards the outstanding dues and the same were accepted by the petitioner. 14. We have heard both the parties at length, taken all their submissions into account and perused the documents and evidences placed on record by them. It has become very clear that there was loan agreement between both the parties which is not denied by both of them. A total amount in default is ₹ 80,73,76,364.84 including interest, penal interest and other expenses. Therefore, there is no doubt that both the parties shared a relationship ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny Law Appellate Tribunal in the case of Palogix Infrastructure P. Ltd. v. ICICI Bank Ltd. [2018] 1 Comp Cas-OL 140 (NCLAT) (Company Appeal (AT) No. 30 of 2017), the hon'ble National Company Law Appellate Tribunal in this case held that (page 150) : This apart, if an officer, such as senior manager of a bank has been authorised to grant loan, for recovery of loan or to initiate a proceeding for 'corporate insolvency resolution process' against the per son who have taken loan, in such case the 'corporate debtor' cannot plead that the officer has power to sanction loan, but such officer has no power to recover the loan amount or to initiate 'corporate insolvency resolution process', in spite of default of debt. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rdingly this Bench hereby admits this petition prohibiting all of the following of item I, namely : (I) (a) the institution of suits or continuation of pending suits or proceedings against the corporate debtor including execution of any judgment, decree or order in any court of law, Tribunal, arbitration panel or other authority ; (b) transferring, encumbering, alienating or disposing of by the corporate debtor any of its assets or any legal right or beneficial interest therein ; (c) any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the corporate debtor in respect of its property including any action under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
