Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2017 (2) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 703 - HC - Companies LawWinding up - whether the IDBI Bank Limited, a Consortium Leader representing the consortium of 21 banks who have lent and advanced huge amounts to the respondent company can be allowed to intervene in this company petition at the stage of admission of the company petition or can be allowed to intervene only after the company petition is admitted and notice is issued for final hearing of the company petition? - Held that:- A perusal of the company application filed by the intervenor indicates that the working capital consortium and term loan dues of the term lenders outstanding is ₹ 8593.00 crore and ₹ 945.00 crore respectively. It is thus clear that insofar as the petitioner is concerned, the alleged liability of the petitioner recoverable from the respondent company is hardly 2% of the total debts of the other lenders and is at 1% of the debts of the total creditors. In my view, the intervenors are thus entitled to oppose this petition and are entitled to be heard at the admission stage of this petition. Any order of admission of this petition will seriously hamper the interest of large number of lenders which are participating in the process of restructuring of the respondent company. I am thus inclined to allow the intervention application filed by the IDBI Bank Limited and permit them to intervene in the present proceedings at the admission stage. Scope of revival - rectification and restructuring actions - Held that:- When 98% of the creditors in value of the total debts of the respondent have agreed to oppose this petition for winding up and have been participating in the JLF's meetings to take steps for rectification and restructuring of the respondent and some decisions taken by the said JLF are under implementation, in view, the petition at the instance of the petitioner who claims about 1% of the total debts of the respondent cannot be entertained. An order of winding up in favour of the petitioner would not benefit the petitioner or the creditors of the respondent generally. Even if there are any chances of revival of the respondent-company which are attempted by the creditors of more than 98% in value, any adverse order passed in this petition at this stage would hamper the chances of revival of the respondent. Powers of the Company Court under Section 539 of the Companies Act, 1956 are discretionary and have to be exercised cautiously and judiciously. In the facts of this case, we are satisfied that the respondent-company which has a temporary set back and is making a sincere attempt of its revival with the assistance of large number of the creditors, it would not be desirable and in the interest of all the creditors including the petitioner to pass any order of winding up against the respondent-company at this stage.
|