TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore, no prejudice is going to be caused to the debt due to the present applicant or for that matter any other Creditor even in case Insolvency Resolution Process is initiated under Section 7 of the Code. In case CP No.(IB) 48/2017 is not admitted, the present Applicant can pursue his remedies in the winding up proceedings pending before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay. Therefore, there is no need to permit the present Applicant to intervene in the proceedings in CP No.(IB) 48/2017, that too on the date on which the matter is listed for pronouncement of orders in CP No.(IB) 48/2017. - I.A. No. 188/NCLT/AHM/2017 In C.P. No. (IB) 48/7/NCLT/AHM/2017 - - - Dated:- 18-7-2017 - MR. BIKKI RAVEENDRA BABU, J. For The Applicant : Saurabh Soparkar,Ld. Sr. Adv., Jaimin Dave, Bhadrish S. Raju and Udit Mendiratta, Advs. For The Respondent : Animesh Bisht, Sahil Shah, Ishan Ravendranath, Advs and Ms. Petrusha Deas ORDER 1. Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited filed this Application for intervention in the proceedings filed by State Bank of India against Alok Industries Ltd., for triggering Insolvency Resolution Process under Section 7 of The Insolvency and Bankr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ombay, any order passed in CP No.(IB) 48/2017 will lead to conflicting orders being passed by different forums. The present Application is filed before this Authority on 17.7.2017. The notice on this Application has been served on the State Bank of India and Alok Industries Ltd. 3. Heard the arguments of learned Senior Counsel appearing for Industrial And Commercial Bank of China Ltd and the learned counsel appearing for the State Bank of India and Alok Industries Ltd. 4. It is stated that HSBC filed Company Petition No. 194 of 2016 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay as an Agent of Lenders and the present Applicant is one of the Lenders and therefore the Applicant has got a right to intervene in the proceedings in CP No.(IB) 48/2017 which is listed for pronouncement of orders on this date, i.e., 18th July, 2017. 5. There is no dispute about the fact that Industrial And Commercial Bank of China Limited is one of the Financial Creditors of Alok Industries Ltd. There is no dispute about the fact that HSBC as an Agent of some of the Lenders filed winding up Petition No. 194/2016 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay. It is also a fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nancial Creditors'. Whereas Company Petition No. 194 of 2016 is filed by an Agent of some other Financial Creditors including the present Applicant. 13. There is no bar in the Insolvency Code either expressly or impliedly debarring the creditors from triggering the insolvency resolution process under Sections 7, 9, 10 of the Insolvency Code, other than Section 11 of the Code. Section 11 of the Code listed out the persons not entitled to make Application. Section 11 of the Code has got four clauses. State Bank of India and its Associate Banks do not come under any of the Clauses of Section 11 of the Code. Therefore, there is nothing that prevent the State Bank of India and its Associate Banks who are Financial Creditors from triggering the insolvency resolution process under Section 7 of the Code. 14. The pendency of winding up proceedings before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay before its admission is no bar either for the initiation of proceedings under Section 7 of the Code or for continuation of such proceedings. 15. In the case on hand, in Company Petition No. 194 of 2016, the winding up petition has not yet been admitted; no winding up order has been passed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orce including the Companies Act, 1956. It is also observed in the said order that the said provisions have not been brought to the notice of the Hon'ble Judge of the Madras High Court in the petitions filed by Vasan Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras vide Company Applications No. 462 and 463 of 2017 in Company Petition No. 267 of 2015 on the file of Hon'ble High Court of Madras. It is a fact that Hon'ble High Court of Madras stayed the order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench passed in CA / 1/(IB)/2017 on 21.4.2017. However, in view order of the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench, and in view of the observations made by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, it is more than clear that the provisions of the Insolvency Code will prevail over all other Laws in force in case of inconsistency including the Companies Act, 1956 under which winding up proceedings have been initiated. 19. Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant cited the decision in M/s. Nowfloats Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. Getit Infoservices (P.) Ltd ., reported in 2017 SCC OnLine NCLT 89 , rendered by the National Company La ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
