NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 156(3) OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908, SECTION 52, 54 OF THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872, RULE 4 , 4(3) OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY (APPLICATION TO ADJUDICATING AUTHORITY) RULES, 2016, SECTION 7, 7(1), 7(2), 7(5), 7(5)(A), 8, 8(1), 8(2), 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21(6A)(A), 21(6A)(B), 31(1), 33 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016 AND SECTION 138, 141 OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, 1881

Deepraj Investments Pvt. Ltd Vs. Sai Precious Traexim Private Limited, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0033

NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant on behalf of Applicant claiming to be Financial Creditor under Section 7 of the IBC, 2016. While allowing the application NCLT held that mere plain reading of the provision and the decision referred above show that under Section 7 of IBC, 2016, the Adjudicating Authority to see whether there is a financial debt and default has occurred in repayment of that debt or not, the application is complete or whether any disciplinary proceedings is pending against the proposed RP or not. So far dispute is concerned like Section 9 of the IBC, 2016, in section 7 of IBC, 2016, proceedings, there is no scope to raise the disputes. Therefore, the averments made in the reply regarding the dispute raised by the Corporate Debtor is concerned, in our considered view, is not liable to accepted. When we shall consider the case in hand, in the light of aforesaid provision and the decision, then we find that the application is complete and the loan has been disbursed and the same has not been not paid by the Corporate Debtor, therefore there is default in payment of debt, there is no disciplinary proceedings pending against the RP. Therefore, we have no option but to admit the application under Section 7(5)(a) of the IBC, 2016.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 8, 9, 13(1)(B), 13(1)(C), 14, 14(1), 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 31(1), 33 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016

Image
Maloo Bhatt And Co. Vs. Pet Metal Private Limited, (2020) 08 NCLT CK 0024 NCLT allowed the Application filed by the Operational Creditor under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code,2016, to initiate Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process against Corporate Debtor for the amount of debt related to invoice raised for audit fees and other professional work. While allowing the appeal NCLT held that the amount of debt is more than Rs. 1 lacs which is not barred by law of limitation. The said amount has not been paid and no plausible defence has been put forward by Corporate Debtor. The Applicant has also provided MCA Data of the Corporate Debtor. The application is otherwise complete and defect free. It is also noted that no disciplinary proceedings are pending against the IRP whose consent is on record. Hence, he can be appointed to conduct Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Accordingly, we admit this application and order.
Read more

NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 133, 230, 231, 232 OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013 AND RULE 3, 3(2) OF THE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL RULES, 2016

Image
Kalyankari Suppliers Private Limited And Ors Vs. Shiv Coal Benification And Power Private Limited, (2020) 05 NCLT CK 0015 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant under Section 230 to 232 read with Companies (Arrangements, Compromises and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 in relation to Scheme of Amalgamation (For brevity "Scheme") proposed between the Applicants. While allowing the application NCLT held that taking into consideration the application and the documents filed herewith, we propose to issue the directions with respect to calling, convening and holding the meeting of Equity Shareholders, Partners, secured and unsecured creditors or dispensing the same.
Read more

NCLT JUDGEMENT ON SECTION 8, 8(1), 8(2), 9, 9(5)(1), 14, 15,16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 31(1), 33 OF THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE, 2016

Image
Centuary Road Transport Pvt. Ltd Vs. Tyson Retail Services Pvt. Ltd, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0044 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant under Section 9 of the IB Code for initiation of the CIRP of Corporate Debtor.   While allowing the application NCLT held that in view of Section 8, after the receiving of the demand notice delivered under Section 8(1) of the IB Code the Corporate Debtor is required to send the reply to demand notice or raised the pre-existing dispute or show the documents regarding the payment of the unpaid debt but here as we noticed that the Corporate Debtor has neither raised the pre-existing dispute nor filed any document to show that the amount has been paid by the Corporate Debtor to the Operational Creditor. If we shall consider the case in hand in the light of aforesaid provision then we find that herein the case in hand neither pre-existing dispute is raised nor payment of the unpaid Operation Debt is made, the application is complete and the ...
Read more