2017 (9) TMI 1965

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s" for short) with a request to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against, Onaex Natura Private Limited categorising it as 'Corporate Debtor'. 2. The facts, that are necessary for disposal of this Application, are as follows; 2.1. Two of the Shareholders of Onaex Natura Private Limited, i.e., Respondent herein filed Company Petition No. 51 of 2011 before the Company Law Board, Mumbai Bench, alleging acts of oppression and mismanagement under Section 397, 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 against Onaex Natura Private Limited and its two Directors. In the said Petition, M/s. Engenious Engineering Private Limited, Applicant herein was added as 'Respondent No.4'. The said Company Petition come to be disposed of by the&nb .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e of payment. Applicant also filed Certificate of Auditor of Respondent Company stating that there is an Unsecured Loan from Engenious Engineering Private Limited as on 31.3.2016 for an amount of Rs. 78,94,887 /-. 3. Basing on the above said material, Applicant is claiming to be the Financial Creditor. 4. This Application has been filed before this Tribunal on 9th August, 2017. Applicant has despatched copy of the Application to the Respondent Company on 1st August, 2017 and filed proof of despatch. When this matter was listed before this Adjudicating Authority on 234 August, 2017, this Authority directed the Applicant to serve notice of hearing and file proof of service. Accordingly, the Applicant filed proof of service. None appeared fo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... licant from the Respondent Company is a 'financial debt' or not. 'Financial Debt' is defined in Section 5(8) of the Code. 7. The amount claimed in this case, according to the Applicant, is for allotment of shares of the Respondent Company. In fact, 5,25,000 shares of the Respondent Company were allotted to the Applicant Company but the allotment of such shares was held to be illegal and the allotment was set aside by an order of Company Law Board. 8. It appears that the only property of the Respondent Company was sold with the permission of the Applicant Company and the amount is lying in the National Company Law Tribunal. There is no order from the National Company Law Tribunal that Applicant is entitled for the amount invested by it for .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X