Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2019 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 1763 - HC - Companies LawProviding of Working Capital under Joint Lenders Restructuring Agreement (JLRA) - implementation of restructuring package - defaulted in performance of obligations under the JLRA - Issuance of appropriate writ / order / direction directing the Reserve Bank of India to ensure compliance / implementation of its Guidelines / Circulars dated 30th January, 2014, 26th February, 2014 and 5th May, 2017, vis-à-vis the Joint Lenders Restructuring Agreement (JLRA) dated 27th June, 2015 - whether the JLRA did provide for working capital beyond ₹ 75 Crores? HELD THAT:- Had the appellant really wanted implementation and enforcement of obligations arising out of the JLRA, it should have taken appropriate steps at the relevant time, before having requested for implementation of the S4A Scheme, or even consenting to the same. Present action, in our opinion, is highly belated, at least as regards seeking specific performance of the JLRA. Moreover, the CAP having been changed from “restructuring”, to “recovery”, granting the appellant’s prayers would necessarily mean overlooking the appellant’s own action in abandoning its efforts under the JLRA, and moving on to the S4A Scheme, and thereby turning the clock back on a process, which, under the current legal and economic scenario in the country, is mandated to be extremely time bound and forward moving. Further, the writ petition was filed by the appellant on 21st May, 2018 much after the ICICI Bank approached the NCLT, Chandigarh on 9th March, 2018. So, it is clear that the writ petition was filed as an afterthought, only with a view to possibly interdict the proceedings already initiated by ICICI. Also, it cannot be overlooked that the account maintained with the ICICI Bank was declared as NPA on 31st December, 2016. The respondents 2, 4 and 5 issued notices under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act to the appellant Company. A recall notice was sent to the appellant to pay a sum of ₹ 1,77,77,60,053.15/- which the appellant had failed to pay. Merely because the amendments incorporated in the Banking Regulations Act, 1949 empower the Central Government and the RBI to issue directions for resolution of stressed assets, the same does not create any entitlement or right in the hands of the borrower, who is admittedly a defaulter. Moreover, proceedings having been initiated by the ICICI Bank, which are in the nature of judicially monitored resolution of stressed assets, nothing precludes the appellant from seeking resolution before the NCLT in those proceedings. Appeal dismissed as infructuous.
|