Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2017 (10) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (10) TMI 912 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyProceedings under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - whether as the matter being subjudice before the Hon'ble High Court, hence no parallel proceedings under I&B Code 2016 must be carried out simultaneously? - Held that:- This Bench is of the opinion that once a Petition has been transferred from the High Court, then unless and until it is recalled by an order of the High Court, the Petition cannot be transmitted back to High Court. We, as a subordinate Court, cannot and must not revert back a Petition with an observation that the same to be decided by the Hon'ble High Court. There is no dispute on facts that this Petition in question, was transferred by the Hon'ble High Court, hence the NCLT has neither jurisdiction nor empowered to reverse that direction of the Hon'ble High Court. Facts of the case have revealed that the Petitioner is running a proprietary concern viz. M/s. M. Tex-Chem, Ghatkopar, Mumbai and on 12-04-2006, the Company had placed order for supply of “Silicon 5000”. The agreed payment term was 30 days, else 24% interest was payable. Since 2006, the Petitioner was regularly supplying the goods. The books of Accounts are duly maintained and demonstrated that the receivable amount as on 12-05-2014 was ₹ 10,74,450, The Petitioner had sent the Ledger Account to the Debtor Company for verification which was marked as “tallied” by one of the Company's Officer, as also duly stamped. The Petitioner issued a legal notice; however, no payment was made. Having no option left, the Petitioner filed the Petition before the Hon'ble High Court under the old provisions of the Companies Act. As a result the “Debt” as also the “Default” has duly been established by the Petitioner. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances this Petition now under consideration deserves to be “Admitted”. The Petitioner has proposed the name of the Interim Resolution Professional Mr. Hemant Mehta, Registration No. IBBI/IPA-001/IP-P00027/2016-17/10060. The appointed IRP shall perform the duties as defined under section 18 of the Code. He shall also submit the resolution plan for approval as prescribed under section 31 of the Code. Since the Petition is “Admitted”, hence the Moratorium shall commence as prescribed under section 14 of the I&B Code
|