9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1352X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2018 onwards and date of default from November 2021, the petition is not hit by limitation. This is a fit case for initiation proceedings under section 227 read with rule 5 of the Rules ibid, since the debt in question qualifies as financial debt under section 5(8) read with section 3(11) of the Code - The Petition made by the Reserve Bank of India is complete in all respects as required by law. It clearly shows that the Respondent/FSP is in default of a debt due and payable, and the default is more than the minimum amount as stipulated under section 4(1) of the Code. Therefore, the default stands established and there is no reason to deny the admission of the Petition. Petition admitted - moratorium declared. - CP (IB) No. 295/KB/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Petitioner/Appropriate Regulator submits as follows :- (a) On the basis of credit information available to it, the Reserve Bank of India (in short RBI ) came to the conclusion that SIFL has committed defaults of significant amount in relation to the financial debt availed by it from various financial creditors; (b) In particular, UCO Bank has intimated vide its letter dated 07/10/2021 that the amount claimed to be in default in relation to working capital demand loan facility is ₹165,56,30,967.99. Of this the principal amount due is to the tune of ₹150.00 crore and the interest amount due is to the tune of ₹15,56,30,967.99. (c) Date of default with reference to repayment of principal sum is stated to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rectors of SIFL and appointed Mr. Rajneesh Sharma as the Administrator. It has also constituted a three-member Advisory Committee to assist the Administrator of SIFL in the discharge of its duties. The RBI has proposed the same person to be appointed as the Administrator of the Corporate Debtor. 7. Mr. Sudipto Sarkar, Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner/ Appropriate Regulator submits that in view of the huge default committed by the respondent/FSP, there is a need to initiate CIRP against the respondents with speed. He, therefore, urged this Adjudicating Authority to pass appropriate orders expeditiously keeping in view the public interest in the matter. 8. Mr. Sudipto Sarkar, Learned Counsel, further submitted tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limitation. 11. We have heard Mr. Sudipto Sarkar, Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner/Appropriate Regulator and perused the records. 12. The documents placed on records prima facie prove that there has been a default and that the sum involved in such default is in excess of the threshold limit of one crore rupees prescribed at present under section 4(1) of the Code. Moreover, since the sanction letters are in the year 2018 onwards and date of default from November 2021, the petition is not hit by limitation. 13. We are, therefore, satisfied that this is a fit case for initiation proceedings under section 227 read with rule 5 of the Rules ibid, since the debt in question qualifies as financial debt under secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ule 5 of the Insolvency Bankruptcy (Insolvency and Liquidation Proceedings of Financial Service Providers and Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2019 for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited [CIN:L29219WB1985-PLC055352], the Financial Service Provider, is hereby admitted. b. There shall be moratorium in terms of section 14 of the Code in respect of Financial Service Provider. c. The moratorium shall have effect from the date of this order till the completion of the CIRP or until this Adjudicating Authority approves the resolution plan under section 31(1) of the IBC or passes an order for liquidation of the Financial Service Provider under section 33 of the Code ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
