2018 (1) TMI 1344

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... thority) Rules, 2016 seeking Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process in respect of Bee Ceelene Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd., styling it as 'Corporate Debtor'. 2. It is stated in the Petition that Radhakishan Bhagwandas Ruchandani is Proprietor of R.B. Synthetics. It is also stated in the Petition that Radhakishan Bhagwandas Ruchandani is the Karta of HUF. Further, it is the case of the Petitioners that an amount of Rs. 13,49,289.96 ps. is due to R.B. Synthetics from the Respondent and an amount of Rs. 20,35,998.45 ps. is due to Radhakishan Bhagwandas Ruchandani (HUF) from the Respondent. In the first instance, in support of the Petition, Petitioners filed Audited Financial Statement as on 31.3.2012 and Certificate of the Banker. Thereaf .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Bhagwandas Ruchandani is the Authorized Person to file this Petition on behalf of R.B. Synthetics and Radhakishan Bhagwandas Ruchandani (HUF). 5. The second objection raised by the Respondent is that amount shown in the Balance Sheets do not disclose as to how those balances got created and when those balances are payable or receivable. It is also pointed out in the Objections that no amount is shown/reflected to be outstanding in the names of the Petitioners in the latest audited Financial Statement as on 31st March, 2012 of the Respondent Company in the documents furnished by the Petitioners which is in Annexure 'E' of Form-1. 6. A perusal of the audited accounts for the years 2006 to 2011 shows that there are some Unsecured Loa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to assume that the Loans and Advances shown in the Balance Sheets are not paid. 9. In view of the above discussion, it can only be held that Petitioners failed to establish the existence of 'financial debt' as on 31.3.2012. The finding in the Order in T.P. No. 26 of 2016 is based on the accounts up to 31.3.2011. When there is no mention about the names of the Petitioners in the Audited Accounts for the year 2012, basing upon the finding in T.P. No. 26 of 2016, it is not possible to hold that a financial debt is due to the Petitioners from the Respondent. Even assuming that there is a financial debt, it is not known when it is payable. There is no material on record to show that when the so-called financial debt is payable. No dema .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X