9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 1194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeal has been filed against the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), New Delhi Bench (Court-II) dated 17.05.2022 by which the Application filed under Section 9 of the IBC by the Appellant, an Operational Creditor, has been dismissed and the Adjudicating Authority has also directed by the same order to issue show-cause notice under Section 65(1) to the parties for appropriate action. The brief facts of the case which are necessary to be noticed are: A loan of Rs.7 Crores was obtained from IndiaBulls in favour of the Corporate Debtor which document has now been screen shared by the Learned Counsel appearing for the Corporate Debtor before us and he pointed out that the loan was applied by the Corporat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r of the year 2015-16 where there was no related party shown. 6. We have considered the submissions of the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record. Paragraphs 19, 20 & 21 of the impugned order contains the relevant discussion by the Adjudicating Authority which are to the following effect:- "19. Hence, it is clear from the aforesaid analysis that both the Applicant Company, which has claimed the operational debt based on an invoice for a loan procured for the Corporate Debtor and the Corporate Debtor against whom the Applicant is seeking to initiate CIR Process were having common Director namely, Mr. Gulshan Kumar Jhurani (DIN: 00209894). By way of visiting the records at the MCA Website and on piercing the corporate veil, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present Application has not been filed for the resolution of Insolvency rather, the parties have attempted to kickstart the CIR Process with a malicious intent for a purpose other than the resolution of insolvency of the Corporate Debtor, which is not permissible under the IBC 2016. As per the Code, if any person [as defined under Section 3(23) of IBC] initiates the Insolvency Resolution Process fraudulently or with malicious intent for any purpose other than for the resolution of the insolvency, or liquidation and such an act is punishable under Section 65 (I) of IBC 2016. Hence, before taking any action under Section 65(1) IBC 2016, we think it proper to issue a show cause notice, under Rule 59 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t debt itself is doubtful. No error has been committed by the Adjudicating Authority in refusing to initiate the CIRP on such suspicious debt. Thus, the order of the Adjudicating Authority refusing to initiate CIRP cannot be faulted and we affirm the said order passed by the Adjudicating Authority. 10. Now, we come to the submission of the Counsel for the Appellant regarding show-cause notice under Section 65(1) of the IBC. The notice has been issued consequent to the impugned order passed, to which the parties were entitled to file reply. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that the Appellant has already filed a Reply to show-cause notice and Learned Counsel for the Respondent submits that he has also filed a Reply to the show-cause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
