Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2018 (8) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 2066 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Financial Creditors - existence of debt and dispute or not - Doctrine of Estoppel - HELD THAT:- The fact remains that all the group companies represented by their Authorised Representative had approached the banks and signed the documents together projecting themselves as one entity. Here an example has to be given wherein five persons put together approach a lender for a loan facility treating them as one unit and the lender consents for advancing/ disbursing the money as per the request of the parties concerned or to whomsoever suggested by the entire group together, then, in the event of default, the lender shall have to treat all the five members as one unit and can proceed against them singly or jointly as per law - the obligor and co-obligors to the debt are a single unit and disbursement to one obligor amounts to disbursement to all of them put together and hence the Videocon group companies are jointly and severally liable. The appointment of different IRP’s to each group company separately is perfectly legal and perhaps it’s the only way the procedure has to be worked out. Therefore, we are completely in tune with the explanation given by the Ld. Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and we hereby hold that appointment of different IRP’s to each company differently is not hit by any provisions of the Code and hence is perfectly maintainable. The ‘Doctrine of Estoppel’ is clearly applicable and tilts the entire case in favour of the Petitioner. Apart from that it can be noticed from the documentation that term “obligor” and “co-obligor” is used for the entities which means, in so far as the loan agreement, there is no distinction between an obligor and a co-obligor as far as the liability is concerned and legally all of them must be considered as “Debtors” for the purpose of this Code - the arrangement and the manner in which the documentation was done for the purpose of advancing loans is perfectly legal and the Corporate Debtor herein is liable to pay the debt and is bound by the proceedings as projected in Form 1 and since there is a default in the repayment of the same, the application is hereby admitted. It is satisfied that a debt and default is in existence, therefore this Company Petition is hereby admitted - moratorium declared.
|