9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 84X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cial Creditor - time limitation - HELD THAT:- The Corporate Debtor having committed default, initiation of Section 7 proceeding by Assignee of the State Bank of India cannot be said to be malicious or fraudulent. The State Bank of India has assigned its debt to the Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd on 19.03.2014 and assignee on the strength of assignment has initiated the proceeding under Section 7. The Adjudicating Authority in its order dated 25.04.2023 has also repelled the contention of the Appellant that Financial Creditor has played fraud and the Petitioner is acting malafide in filing the petition. Thus, submission of the Appellant that Financial Creditor is acting malafide in filing the petition has been expressly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 7 application being C.P.(IB)No.1164/MB-IV/2020 filed by Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. (Respondent herein) has been admitted by the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench IV. The Corporate Debtor in both the appeals are sister concern. The Appellant No.1 herein claim to be investment vehicle for the Shrem Group to invest fresh share capital into the Corporate Debtor and Appellant No.2 is Suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor. Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1031 of 2023 2. In the year 2008, State Bank of India granted a facility to Perfect Engine Components Private Limited (PECPL). Additional facility was granted by Sanction Letter dated 31.03.2011. On 28.06.2012, the State Bank of India declared the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Adjudicating Authority to consider the Company Petition on merits. The Perfect Engine Components Private Ltd. filed appeal before the Hon ble Supreme Court being Civil Appeal No. 492 of 2023 challenging the order of this Appellate Tribunal which appeal also came to be dismissed on 17.02.2023. The Adjudicating Authority after hearing both the parties by order dated 25.04.2023 admitted Section 7 application holding that debt and default is proved. It was also held that debt is acknowledged by the Corporate Debtor in the Balance Sheet. Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1055 of 2023 3. The State Bank of India has granted Term Loan to the Corporate Debtor Perfect Engineering Products Ltd. in the year 2007. There are further Sanction L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is submitted that with regard to the Corporate Debtor Perfect Engine Components Private Ltd., in the earlier round before this Appellate Tribunal as well as before the Hon ble Supreme Court issue pertaining to Section 65 has not been considered. It is submitted that proceedings were initiated by the Financial Creditor only as recovery mechanism which is not permissible. 6. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the Appellant and perused the record. 7. With regard to Company Appeal (AT) (Ins.) No. 1031 of 2023, it is to be noticed that initially when Section 7 application was rejected on the ground that there was no default and the application is barred by limitation, the matter was taken to this Tribunal by means ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al No.492 of 2023 challenging the order passed by this Tribunal. Only ground raised was that under the Restructuring Proposal, Appellant was liable to pay the amount from the operational cashflow only. The amount was not payable unless there was operational cashflow, which submission was expressly rejected by the Hon ble Supreme Court by its judgment dated 17.02.2023, which order is as follows: ORDER We do not find any good ground and reason to interfere with the impugned judgment, as in our opinion, the appellant had to pay Rs.77.50 crore in installments with effect from 30.06.2015 towards the satisfaction of the decretal amount. The stipulation in the Restructuring Package/Proposal that the appellant will pay the said amount ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hority in its order dated 25.04.2023 has also repelled the contention of the Appellant that Financial Creditor has played fraud and the Petitioner is acting malafide in filing the petition. In Para 30 and 31 following has been held: 30. The argument of the Corporate Debtor that by virtue of the Petitioner holding shares in the Corporate Debtor, the Petitioner is acting malafide in filing the present petition is entirely unfounded and frivolous. On the contrary, it is submitted that in fact by virtue of the Petitioner holding 13.5% equity shares, the Petitioner is acting in a judicious manner to not act against its own interest and to rehabilitate the Corporate Debtor at the earliest in order to ensure the financial stability of the com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
