Home Case Index All Cases Insolvency and Bankruptcy Insolvency and Bankruptcy + Tri Insolvency and Bankruptcy - 2022 (10) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 927 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL , AMARAVATI BENCHMaintainability of petition - initiation of CIRP - Corporate Debtor failed to make repayment of its dues - Personal Guarantor of the Corporate Debtor - existence of debt and dispute or not - Section 95 of IBC, 2016 - HELD THAT:- What the Creditor has to serve is the copy of the application "made under sub-section (1)" to the Debtor. Reading Rule 7(2) with Rule 3 shows that the application filed under sub-section (1) of Section 95 shall be submitted in Form - C and the Creditor will serve forthwith "a copy of the application" to the Guarantor and the Corporate Debtor for whom the Guarantor is a Personal Guarantor. Thus, what has to be served is the copy of application which has been "submitted". What is contemplated is that the application in Form C should be "submitted" and then the Creditor should serve forthwith a copy of the application to the Guarantor and the Corporate Debtor for whom the Guarantor is a Personal Guarantor. The procedure thus prescribed will give the Personal Guarantor, notice of the application already filed before the Adjudicating Authority. Section 95(5) requires the Creditor to provide a copy of the application "made under sub-section (1)", to the Debtor. Thus, serving advance copy is not contemplated. Section 99(4) of IBC, empowers the Resolution Professional to seek further information or explanation in connection with the application as may be required from the Debtor or the Creditor or any other person, who, in the opinion of the Resolution Professional, may provide such information. Hence it is not as if, the Debtor is not provided an audience before the submission of the report - in the present case, there is no violation of principles of natural justice by not giving an opportunity to the Debtor for making his submissions before the appointment of IRP - no notice is required for the Respondent at the stage of appointment of IRP. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that there is no hurdle to entertain this application under Section 95 of IBC, 2016, since the application is found to be complete. Petition admitted - moratorium declared.
|