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 1580 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, GUWAHATIMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Financial Creditors - pledge/mortgage of property - existence of debt and dispute or not - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that the FC had initiated the proceeding under Section 19 (3) Of the ORT Act not only against the principal debtor-- but- also against the guarantors in respect Of loan sanctioned in favour of the principal debtor. It is also not in dispute that the CD herein being one of the guarantors was made a party to the aforesaid proceeding before the DRT, Kolkata - There is also no quarrel over the fact that in the proceeding before the ORT, Kolkata, the FC has prayed for recovery certificate for an amount to the tune ₹ 121,41,39,813.00 of and also for enforcement of such certificate in the event, such a certificate is granted, and that too, by disposing the properties/assets Which the principal debtor pledged [mortgaged with the FC and if necessary, by also by disposing the property which the guarantors pledged 'mortgaged with the FC. Such revelations also show that the assets/properties of the Cd herein which were pledged / mortgaged with the FC in likely to disposed of in the event of the enforcement of the recovery certificate from the side of the DRT, Kolkata. When such admitted or well evident positions are considered in the light Of laid down in section 14 of the Code of 2016, it would appear clearly that directions in the aforesaid section needs to be extended to proceeding in question, now pending before the DRT, Kolkata. Being so, in my opinion, in the event of admission Of the present application, this Adjudicating Authority would be required to declare by order moratorium for the purposes, so specified in Section 14 Of the Code Of 2016. In that event, the moratorium, declared would also cover the proceeding pending before the DRT, Kolkata. The claim advanced from the side Of CD that the application in hand could not disclose even the "claim" as contemplated in sect•on 3(6), much less its such application establishing the fact that the CD owed a debt to the FC as on 11 .08.2017 or that there was a default in repayment Of loan on same date, same being 11.08.2017, are wholly without any element of truth. The petition is admitted - moratorium declared.
|