Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2019 (11) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (11) TMI 1402 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its debt - debt due and payable or not - time limitation - HELD THAT:- It is worthwhile to note that writ petition filed by the corporate debtor has been dismissed. Thus, at the first instance no merits have been found by the Honble High Court in the claims made by the corporate debtor in such petition though such decision has been challenged in appeal. Be that as it may, we have to see the nature of facilities and terms and conditions related thereto to ascertain whether debt is due or payable or not. Original term loan had been repaid. Thereafter, fund based and non fund based credit facilities have been obtained. The fund based credit facilities comprises of cash credit against hypothecation of stocks and book debts and working capital term loan. Debt due and payable or not - HELD THAT:- There is no merit in the claim of the corporate debtor that debt is not due and payable. As regard to validity of deed of assignment on account of multiple parties being involved, insufficient stamp duty, consent of corporate debtor, we note that these issues have been raised earlier in different cases before us and after considering the scheme and objects of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 along with specific provisions of Sec.3(6) containing definition of term "claim" and Sec.238 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, these aspects have not found favour - Accordingly, these aspects are not relevant for petition filed under Sec. 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Accordingly, this contention of the corporate debtor is also rejected. Time Limitation - HELD THAT:- If averment made before a court of law or any statutory authority cannot be constituted as an acknowledgment of debt then that would render such averment meaningless. Legally such averment bind party making them. Doctrine of estoppel applies without any restriction in commercially and legally. Accordingly, such statement constitute acknowledgment - if such promise is made after expiry of original limitation period also, the limitation period gets extended as condition of acknowledgment before expiration exists only under Sec. 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The petition is otherwise complete in all respects and defect free. Application admitted - moratorium declared.
|