9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 914X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 18.09.2019 passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh) by which an application filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (in short 'Code') by the State Bank of India (Financial Creditor) for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (in short 'CIRP') in respect of Saber Papers Limited (Corporate Debtor) has been admitted. 2. In brief, the Corporate Debtor availed various loan facilities from the State Bank of Hyderabad (SBH), State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (SBBJ), State Bank of Patiala (SBP) and State Bank of India (SBI) by executing loan security documents and mortgaging the immovable properties by way of deposit of title deeds. The loan acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h. 5. It is worthwhile to mention that while the application filed by the SBI before the DRT was pending, SBH, SBBJ and SBP were amalgamated with the SBI w.e.f. 01.04.2017 and thereafter the SBI filed the application under Section 7 of the Code on 27.09.2018 before the Adjudicating Authority at Chandigarh. In the application filed in Form-1, prescribed in Rule 4 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rules, 2016, it is averred in Part-IV that the total defaulted amount is Rs. 517,72,84,977.85/- and the last date of NPA is 31.10.2013. 6. The Appellant filed an application bearing CA No. 660 of 2019 before the Adjudicating Authority to declare the application, filed under Section 7 of the Code by the Financ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he SBP lead bank and other lending banks i.e. SBP, SBI, SBH, SBBJ, Corporation Bank, Allahabad Bank, J&K Bank Ltd. issued possession notice for taking possession of the properties detailed in the possession notice (page 914 of the paper book). It is further submitted that SBI, SBBJ, SBP and SBH initiated recovery process against the corporate debtor before the DRT and as discussed above, one OA No.1380 of 2017 (OA Old No.1932 of 2015) titled as SBI Vs. Saber Papers Ltd. &Ors, was decided/allowed by DRT III, Chandigarh on 18.08.2017 declaring that the defendants are liable to pay the applicant i.e. SBI a total sum of 5233,10,54,794.04 with costs and future interest on all accounts from 04.11.2015 till realisation (Diary No.4487 dated 02.09.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reements for hypothecation of goods and assets as well as deposit of title deeds were made on various dates thereafter. Therefore, the present application filed on 27.09.2018 is within the period of 12 years. In view of the order of Hon'ble NCLAT in Babulal BardhajiGurjar Vs. Veer Gurjar Aluminium Industries Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Company Appeal (AT)(Insolvency) No.549 of 2018 supra, the present petition is held to be not barred by limitation. 16. The learned counsel for the corporate debtor has argued that there is mis-joinder and non-joinder of the parties in as much as the joint funding and facilities were granted to the corporate debtor by various banks and institutions which is also evident from the Master Restructuring Agreement (MRA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case, we fail to see how this para could possibly help the case of the respondents. Further, it is not for us to interpret, commercially or otherwise, articles of the Limitation Act when it is clear that a particular article gets attracted. It is well settled that there is no equity about limitation - judgments have stated that often time periods provided by the Limitation Act can be arbitrary in nature." 9. On the other hand, Counsel for Respondent has submitted that there is no quarrel with the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gaurav Hargovindbhai Dave (Supra) but a fresh period of limitation became available to the Respondent with the issuance of recovery certificate dated 18.08.2017 which has been placed on re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate was issued by the DRT. 13. There is no doubt that in both the decisions, relied upon by the Respondent, namely, Dena Bank (Supra) and Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. (Supra) the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the limitation would start afresh from the date of issuance of recovery certificate but Counsel for the Appellant has submitted that the application under Section 7 of the Code should have been filed on the basis of the recovery certificate and merely placing on record of the said recovery certificate would not be suffice. 14. We have read both the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by Counsel for the Respondent. The decision in the case of Dena Bank (Supra) has been followed in the case of Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
