Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2019 (10) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 1503 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Financial Creditors - existence of debt and dispute or not - Time Limitation - HELD THAT:- The only defence taken by the Respondent is that the debt being barred by limitation an application under section 7 of the Code could not be maintained. The ‘debt’ defined under section 3(11) of the Code means, a liability or obligation in respect of the claim which is due from any person and includes a financial debt. ‘Default’ defined under section 3 (12) of the Code means, non payment of debt when whole or any part or instalment of the debt has become due and payable and is not paid by the Corporate Debtor - There is no quarrel that the account of the Respondent had been declared NPA. The Application before the DRT-I, Hyderabad was within time. The DRT-I, Hyderabad by order dated 06.11.2017 allowed the Application and ordered recovery of the debt with interest, pendent lite and future, at the rate of 18% per annum. Admittedly the Respondent had committed default in payment of the debt. In view of the orders of the DRT-I, Hyderabad the debt became ‘due and payable’ subsequent to 06.11.2017. Therefore, the defence contention that the debt was time barred cannot be accepted. The issue is answered in the negative. In an application under Section 7 of the Code the reason for the inability of the Respondent in paying off the debt is not required to be looked into by the Adjudicating Authority. What is required to be seen is the default. In this case the default has been satisfactorily proved. Thus the petition needs to be admitted - petition admitted - moratorium declared.
|