Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2018 (7) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 1263 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyCorporate insolvency process - Whether there exists a financial debt owed by the Respondent Company to the Applicants? - Held that:- It is noted that the settlement agreement talks only about the debts due to Naresh Kumar Aneja and is completely silent about the debts owed to Sushant Aneja, Applicant No. 1 or Naresh Kumar Aneja (HUF), Applicant No. 2. Further, there is no explanation or description of the debts to be set off, thus, it cannot be ascertained whether the settlement agreement actually deals with the debts owed to the Applicants by the Respondent Company. Further, nothing has been placed on record to show that the settlement agreement has been actually executed by the parties. For the reasons stated above it is held that a financial debt was owed to the Applicants by the Respondent Company. Whether there has been a default in payment of the financial debt, if any? - Held that:- Taking into consideration all the above, this Tribunal is of the view that a default has been committed in terms of Section 3(12) of the Code of financial debt as defined under Section 5(8) of the Code and that the Applicant has rightly invoked the provisions of the Code. It is also seen from the Application that the above named IRP has given a written consent in Form 2 wherein he has agreed to accept appointments as IRP if Application is admitted. Further, it is also evident from the said Form 2 as filed by the IRP as well as the certificate as enclosed therein signed under his hand that he is not a related party to the Corporate Debtor and that he is eligible to be appointed as an independent director on the Board of the Corporate Debtor.
|