9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorised person named Mr. T.V. Subbaiah, Assistant General Manager, Corporate Finance Branch. The Corporate Debtor is a company incorporated on 09/01/1995 bearing CIN L32200MH1994PLC083853, having a Paid-Up Share Capital of Rs. 34,94,45,000/-. 3. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that vide their Sanction Letters dated 11/09/2014, 09/12/2015 and 27/12/2016 three term loans each of Rs. 10,00,00,000/- were sanctioned in favour of the Corporate Debtor. Therefore, the total amount disbursed was Rs. 30,00,00,000/- and the amount to be in default is Rs. 27,57,60,105.77/- along with interest @12.30% per annum. 4. The abovementioned term loans were sanctioned against hypothecation of programme rights and Pledge of shares of the Corporate Debtor for which the Deed of Hypothecation, Term Loan Agreements, Agreements for Pledge of shares, Undertaking and Trust and Retention Account Agreement were executed to secure the Term Loan Facilities which have also been annexed as Annexure-6 with the copy of the petition by the petitioner. 5. The petitioner further mentioned that the Corporate Debtor failed to repay their outstanding due as per their Undertaking and that several correspondenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which resulted into a substantial fall in the market prices of the shares of the Corporate Debtor. 9. The Corporate Debtor contended that there is no financial debt due on them and payable to the petitioner because the valuable security in the form of pledged shares are already lost by them. Rather, the Corporate Debtor mentioned that they themselves should file appropriate proceeding against the petitioner towards damages and recovery of shares illegally sold by petitioner. 10. The Corporate Debtor also mentioned that the petitioner did not stop there but went on to declare the Corporate Debtor as NPA on 28/09/2017 and soon after that proceeded with selling a large chunk of pledged shares at a price lower than their actual market price and this has caused huge losses to the Corporate Debtor. 11. The counsel appearing on behalf of the Corporate Debtor mentioned that they, along with one M/s Global Showbiz Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Inayata Constructions Pvt. Ltd. has pledged shares in favour of the Petitioner i.e. 9,50,000 equity shares of the Corporate Debtor at Rs. 256.35/- each amounting to Rs. 24,35,32,500/-. 9,50,000/- equity shares of TV Vision Ltd. at Rs. 277,50/- each amounting t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... yield any significant amounts. 14. The counsel for the Corporate Debtor also argued upon the maintainability of the petition by stating that the petitioner is attempted to recover the amount claimed by them without being in position to re-deliver the security pledged which cannot be permitted in law. 15. The petitioner has filed rejoinder wherein the contentions made by the Corporate Debtor are denied in toto. The petitioner mentioned regarding the request made by the Corporate Debtor that once the account is slipped into NPA, restructuring cannot be granted. Further to allow restructuring also there are certain requirements which are to be complied with and the Creditor has to take up a conscious decision not to deviate from any of the RBI circulars/directives as per which the account has to be necessarily declared as NPA. If an account is not serviced with the instalments for more than 90 days, the said account is to be necessarily declared as NPA as per the RBI directives. The Corporate Debtor cannot make any grievance on the same and further as a matter of right cannot insist that their account has to be restructured by this Financial Creditor. 16. The counsel for the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... month of February 2018, after almost four months from its invocation. 20. The Corporate Debtor again submitted that it is a well settled principle of law that the right to pawnee to sue on the debt assumes that the pawnee i.e. the petitioner herein is in a position to redeliver the security pledged on payment of debt and if the pawnee is not in a position to redeliver the security pledged, the pawnee cannot obtain a decree. It was also mentioned that the petitioner is not in a position to redeliver the security pledged with it and therefore, in such event they cannot have both the payments of the debt and also the security. 21. To this Sur-Rejoinder filed by the Corporate Debtor, the petitioner again filed an Additional Rejoinder wherein it was submitted that the first set of pledged shares of SAB Events were sold on 18/10/2017 i.e. 20 days after the account was declared NPA, the second set of SABTNL were sold on 21/02/2018 i.e. 4 months after the account was declared as NPA and the third set of pledged shares of TV Vision were sold on 26/02/2018 i.e. 4 months after the account was declared NPA and therefore, submitted that these shares were not sold by them with inordinate dela ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oan Agreements entered between both the parties which is also admitted by both of them. A total amount of Rs. 30,00,00,000/-was disbursed by the petitioner in favour of the corporate debtor vide sanction letters dated 11/09/2014, 09/12/2015 and 27/12/2016. Therefore, both the parties shared a relationship of creditor and debtor. Also, certain securities were granted by the Corporate Debtor in favour of the petitioner. 27. After perusing all the documents on record and hearing both the parties, we have come to a conclusion that the said amount is due on the Corporate Debtor and there is a default in making the payment towards the liability to the Petitioner. This fact is even not denied by the Corporate Debtor which is also evident from the documents including the various e-mails. The Corporate Debtor contended that the petitioner sold the pledged shares at a lower price and therefore, this petition is not maintainable because the petitioner who is the pawnee in this case is not in a position to redeliver the security pledged and thus cannot obtain a decree. 28. Also, the Corporate Debtor mentioned that they were not informed about the shares being sold by the petitioner which was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ifferent Companies is filed by the petitioner as Exhibit A/3 to their Additional Rejoinder. Therefore, the contention of the Corporate Debtor cannot be relied upon and it cannot be denied that they are liable to pay to the petitioner the amounts due upon them and here it is pertinent to note that the Corporate Debtor time and again requested the petitioner for restructuring of the loan amount. Therefore, it can be said that there was an acknowledgement of the debt by the Corporate Debtor. 30. Hence, it is to be noted that this petition fulfils all the requisite conditions to admit a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and therefore, the petition deserves to be admitted. 31. This Adjudicating Authority, on perusal of the documents filed by the Creditor, is of the view that the Corporate Debtor defaulted in repaying the loan availed. In the light of above facts and circumstances, the existence of debt and default is reasonably established by the petitioner/Financial Creditor as a major constituent for admission of a petition under section 7 of the I&B Code. Therefore, the Application under sub-section (2) of section 7 is taken as complete, according ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
