Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2020 (2) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (2) TMI 694 - Tri - Insolvency and BankruptcyMaintainability of application - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its debt - existence of debt and dispute or not - time limitation - HELD THAT:- A letter regarding strategic investor have been stated to have been written by such person on 1/10/2015 as well as on 8/6/2016 which has formed part of discussion and deliberation between the corporate debtor and financial creditor. The corporate debtor has also referred to a fact that it had paid ₹ 4.34 crore to SBI during the period from 25/8/2014 to 25/8/2015 under "holding on operation" permitted by SBI in terms of the letter dated 25/8/2014. This fact is born out from the letter of demand, copy of the same has been placed at pages 138 to 149 of the reply affidavit of the corporate debtor. It has also been mentioned at para (v) at page 12 of the reply that the proposal of restructuring was given in the year 2016, which was rejected by the bank, copy of such rejection letter dated 1/10/2016 has also been placed on record. These factual aspects, if read with the last payment made then it can be safely concluded that limitation has not expired - in view of Explanation (a) to Sec. 18 of the Limitation Act, such actions constitute an acknowledgment of debt, which is before expiration of original period of limitation, therefore, the debt is not barred by limitation - there are no merits in the ground of the corporate debtor. Consent of all the members of consortium before filing petition under Sec. 7 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - HELD THAT:- No such condition exists either in Sec. 6 or 7 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Thus, if condition of consent by all the members of consortium of lenders/joint lenders forum is considered mandatory for filing a petition under Sec. 7 of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 then it would amount to legislative action which is not in our domain. It would also be inconsistent with the scheme, object and specific provisions of Sec. 3(6) of Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 which define the term "claim" in the widest possible meaning - In the present case the financial creditor has filed application individually. Thus, we hold that consent of other members of the consortium is not required. Jurisdiction - power of authority of the person who has filed the petition - HELD THAT:- We have carefully perused the documents produced by the financial creditor and hold that such person has got the requisite authority to file this petition. Consequently, this ground of the corporate debtor is also rejected. Application is admitted - moratorium declared.
|