9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1971X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lution process against the Corporate Debtor Magnamious Systems Pvt. Ltd. alleging that the Corporate Debtor has filed this petition to clear the dues of Rs. 73,00,605/- against three invoices which had been issued on 13.5.2016. The Petitioner has filed this Petition on the basis of Board Resolution of the Petitioner Company annexed with the Petition on page 22. A copy of the relevant Board Resolution is given for ready reference. Extracts of minutes of meeting of the board of Directors of Software ONE India Pvt. Ltd. held at Tower-B, 34rd floor Global Technology Park, Marathahalli Outer Ring Road, Devarabeesanahalli Village, Vauhur Hobli, Bangalore - 560103 on 5th October, 2017 at 1030 hrs. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "Res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld that the Power of Attorney is not to file the Application under section 7 of the I&B Code, and authorized person has power to do so. 3. The Hon'ble NCLAT has held that the Power of Attorney holder is not competent to file an Application on behalf of the Financial Creditor or Operational Creditor or Corporate Applicant. In view of the law laid down by the NCLAT in Company Appeal No. 30/2017, it is clear that for filing an Application for initiation of CIRP there should be specific authorization for initiation of CIRP. A person cannot file a Petition under section 7, 9 or 10 on the basis of General Power of Attorney. 4. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Operational Creditor has stated that he has filed the Petition under section 9 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onfirmed by NCLAT in Appeal No. 30 of 2017. 7. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the Operation Creditor has submitted that he has filed additional Affidavit containing copy of the Board Resolution dated 29.1.2019. It appears from the Board Resolution of 29.1.2019 that the Board of the Corporate Debtor has by ratification authorized Ms. Meetu Bajaj, Legal Counsel and Company Secretary to institute proceedings under IB Code 2016 (IBC) before any of the Bench of the NCLT by or against the company or withdrawing the matter, for collecting any documents, demand drafts, cheques in satisfaction of the claim/ liability and all other incidental matters thereto as may be considered necessary and expedient. 8. Ld. Counsel representing Operational C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ode, notice under Section 8 is mandatory. After sending the valid notice under Section 8, if the Corporate Debtor fails to make the payment within 10 days, then only the person gets right to file petition under Section 9 of the IB Code, 2016. 12. Admittedly, on the date of issuance of Section 8 notice under IB Code, Petitioner was not authorized for initiation of CIRP. By the implication of the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court, Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner states that Ms. Meetu Bajaj has got authority for initiation of CIRP retrospectively. Since the proceedings/notice under Section 8 was issued without authority, even if we consider that Ms. Meetu Bajaj has been authorized for initiation of CIRP retrospectively, then demand notice und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
