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 376 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - jurisdiction/appropriate forum - Initiation of CIRP against Corporate debtor - Provisional attachment order - Section 60(5) of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - whether the properties sought to attached were acquired from proceeds of crime? - priority to secured creditors - Section 31B of Recovery of Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 - appellant contended that the properties of Corporate Debtor cannot be attached on the ground that it is equivalent to the value of money involved in the money laundering. HELD THAT:- This Application filed under Section 60(5) of IBC, questioning the attachment in respect of assets held by Corporate Debtor. The NCLT alone has jurisdiction to decide the same. Thus, attachment is liable to be raised since the properties attached were not acquired with tainted money and that they were acquired long prior to the alleged offence and there is already security created in favour of the Banks in respect of the assets attached. Hon’ble Apex Court also held in the decision of ARCELORMITTAL INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS SATISH KUMAR GUPTA & ORS. [2018 (10) TMI 312 - SUPREME COURT] wherein Hon’ble Apex Court held by virtue of Section 60(5) of IBC, the NCLT is having jurisdiction to entertain or dispose of any Application by or against Corporate Debtor. Hon’ble Apex Court further held that NCLT alone has jurisdiction to decide the application or proceedings by or against Corporate Debtor. The Provisional Attachment Order is raised - application allowed.
|