courtkutchehry.com National Company Law Tribunal

G Trans Logistics (India) Private Limited Vs. Emtex Engineering Private Limited, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0048 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant against the Corporate Debtor under Section 9 of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016, (hereinafter referred to as the "Code") read with Rule 6 of the IBC, 2016 to initiate corporate insolvency resolution process in respect of Corporate Debtor. While allowing the application NCLT held that in the light of the decisions of the court , when we shall consider the case in hand then we are of the considered view that since it is specifically mentioned in Section 8(2) of the Code that within ten days from the date of the receipt of the demand notice, the corporate-debtor is required to bring to the notice of the operational-creditor, the existence of dispute or the documents regarding the payment of debt, therefore, we have no option, but to hold that since the corporate-debtor fails to give the reply of the demand notice...

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 aforesai...

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 ...

Carlton Overseas Private Limited Vs. Carlton Retail Private Limited, (2020) 05 NCLT CK 0003 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant under Sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred as "Act, 2013") r/w the Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 and the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 for the purpose of the approval of the Scheme of Arrangement outlining the Demerger of (Demerged Undertaking) of Demerged Company into Resulting Company. While allowing the application NCLT held that in the case of Hindustan Lever Employees Union V. Hindustan Lever Limited (1994) 10 SC CK 0036 the three judges Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court held that: A company court does not exercise appellate jurisdiction over a scheme and its jurisdiction is limited to ascertaining fairness, justness and reasonableness of the Scheme and to ensure that neither any law has been violated or public interest compromised in the process...

Burda Druck India Private Limited Vs. Dynamic Textbooks Printers Private Limited, (2020) 05 NCLT CK 0008 NCLT allowing the application filed by the applicant to initiate corporate insolvency resolution process of the Corporate Debtor due to the non-payment of outstanding dues by Corporate Debtor to the Operational Creditor, which is a principal amount and fell due on 7th November, 2017. While allowing the application NCLT held that in view of the Section 19, we are of the considered view that limitation runs from the last date of payment and when we shall count the date of limitation from 18th January, 2017 i.e. date of last payment by the Corporate Debtor then we find that the present application is filed on 11 th September, 2019, therefore, it is within 3 years from the date of last payment made by the Corporate Debtor. For the reasons discussed above, we are of the considered view that in view of Section 9(5)(i)(a) since the application is complete, there is no payment of unpaid ...

Bilaspur Holdings Private Limited And Ors Vs. Rupali Hotels Private Limited, (2020) 05 NCLT CK 0012 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant under Sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred as "Act, 2013") r/w the Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred as "Rules for the purpose of the approval of the Scheme of Amalgamation, as contemplated between the Companies and its Shareholders by way of Amalgamation of Transferor Companies with the Transferee Company. While allowing the application NCLT held that there is no additional requirement for any modification and the Scheme of Amalgamation appears to be fair and reasonable and is not contrary to public policy and not violative of any provisions of law. All the statutory compliances have been made under Sections 230 to 232 of the Act, 2013.

Arviv Lifesciences Private Limited And Ors Vs. Rajasthan Antibiotics Limited, (2020) 05 NCLT CK 0014 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant under Sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred as "Act, 2013") r/w the Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 in relation to the Scheme (for brevity the "SCHEME") seeking dispensation with respect to the meetings of Shareholders and Creditors of the amalgamation of transferors and transferees companies. While allowing the application NCLT held that the Shareholders and Creditors, if any of all the Companies have given their consent affidavits in favour of the Scheme. In view of the same the present joint application stands allowed by dispensing with the meetings of shareholders and creditors of all the applicant companies.

Angelica Technologies Private Limited Vs. Lunarmech Technologies Private Limited, (2020) 05 NCLT CK 0016 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant under Sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred as "Act, 2013") r/w the Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 and the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016, for the purpose of the approval of the Scheme of Amalgamation. While allowing the application NCLT held that in view of the foregoing, upon considering the approval accorded by the members and creditors of the Petitioner Companies to the proposed Scheme and the affidavits filed by the Regional Director, Northern region, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Official liquidator and submissions made by the Standing Counsel for the Income Tax Department, whereby no objections have been raised to the proposed Scheme or if raised has been met by filing undertaking, there appears no impediment to grant sanction to the ...

Alfa Technobuild Private Limited And Ors. Vs. EROS Agro And Farms Private Limited, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0071 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant under Sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred as "Act, 2013") r/w the Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred as "Rules for the purpose of the approval of the Scheme of Amalgamation, as contemplated between the Companies and its Shareholders by way of Amalgamation of Transferor Companies with the Transferee Company. While allowing the application NCLT held that there is no additional requirement for any modification and the Scheme of Amalgamation appears to be fair and reasonable and is not contrary to public policy and not violative of any provisions of law. All the statutory compliances have been made under Sections 230 to 232 of the Act, 2013.

Adonis Electronics Pvt. Ltd Vs. Saka Ltd, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0034 NCLT allowing the application filed by the applicant under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for brevity 'the Code') read with Rule 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority) Rule, 2016 (for brevity 'the Rules') for initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process in respect of Respondent Company. While allowing the application NCLT held that in the present application all the requirements have been satisfied. It is seen that the application preferred by applicant operational creditor is complete in all respect. The material on record clearly goes to show that the respondent committed default in payment of the claimed operational debt even after demand made by the applicant operational creditor. Respondent company also did not raise any dispute regarding the existence of operational debt. In fact, the claim of default committed by the corporate de...

Worldwide Metals Pvt. Ltd Vs. SMW Metal Private Limited, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0030 NCLT dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner, under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for brevity 'code') read with Rules 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Application to Adjudicating Authority), 2016 (for brevity 'the Rules') with a prayer to initiate the Corporate Insolvency process against the Corporate Debtor. While dismissing the petition NCLT held that At this juncture, we would also like to refer the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mobilox Innovations Private Limited Vs. Kirusa Software Private Limited (2017) 09 SC CK 0075 dated 21.09.2017 in which Hon'ble Supreme Court held that "It is clear, therefore, that once the Operational Creditor has filed an application, which is otherwise, complete, the adjudicating authority must reject the application under Section 9(5)(2)(d) if notice of dispute has been received by the Operat...

Torrent Power Limited Vs. TCL Cables Private Limited, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0009 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant, under Sections 230 to 232 and other applicable provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') read with The Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules') for approval of the Scheme of Arrangement. While allowing the application NCLT held that in compliance of sub-section (5) of Section 230 of the Act and Rule 8 of the Companies (CAA) Rules, the Applicant Companies shall send a Notice of meeting with a copy of the Scheme of Arrangement, the Explanatory Statement and the disclosures mentioned under Rule 6 to (1) Central Government through the Regional Director, North Western Region, (2) the Registrar of Companies, Gujarat; and (3) the Income Tax Authorities, (4) Reserve Bank of India;(5) BSE Limited (6) National Stock Exchange Limited as well as (7) S...

Sudha Rani Tayal And Ors Vs. Vintron Communications Pvt. Ltd. And Ors, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0037 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant under Section 60(5) of the IBC praying therein to pass an order for winding up/Liquidation of the Corporate Debtor. While allowing the application NCLT held that the provision quoted in the aforementioned paras shows that Section 33(l)(a) says Where the Adjudicating Authority before the expiry of the insolvency resolution process period or the maximum period permitted for completion of the corporate insolvency resolution process under section 12 or the fast track corporate insolvency resolution process under section 56, as the case may be, does not receive a resolution plan under sub-section (6) of section 30 then adjudicating authority shall pass an order regarding the liquidation of the Corporate Debtor, if we shall consider the case in hand in the light of aforesaid provision then we find, in the case in hand it is specifically mentioned...

Stallion Advisors Private Limited And Ors Vs. Chanda Exports Private Limited, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0027 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant, under Section 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with the Companies (Compromise, Arrangement and amalgamations) Rules, 2016 and the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016, for the purpose of the approval of the Scheme of Amalgamation. While allowing the application NCLT held that in view of the foregoing, upon considering the approval accorded by the members and creditors of the petitioner Companies to the proposed Scheme, and the affidavit by the Regional Director, Northern Region, Ministry of Corporate Affairs and the report of the Official Liquidator and, there appears to be no impediment in sanctioning the present Scheme. Consequently, sanction is hereby granted to the Scheme under Section 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013. The petitioner shall however remain to bound to comply with the statutory requirements in ...

Shiva Pharmachem Limited Vs. Shiva Performance Materials Private Limited, (2020) 06 NCLT CK 0010 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicant under Sections 230 to 232 read with Section 66 and other applicable provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 for the proposed Scheme of Arrangement involves De-merger and transfer of the De-merged Undertaking to the Resulting Company. While allowing the application NCLT held that in compliance of sub-section (5) of Section 230 of the Act and Rule 8 of the Companies (CAA) Rules, the Applicant Companies shall send a Notice of meeting with a copy of the Scheme of Arrangement, the Explanatory Statement and the disclosures mentioned under Rule 6 to (1) Central Government through the Regional Director, North Western Region, (2) the Registrar of Companies, Gujarat; and (3) the Income Tax Authorities, (4) Reserve Bank of India;(5) BSE Limited (6) National Stock Exchange Limited as well as (7) Securities and Exchange Board of India; stating that rep...

Wellworth Capital Services Private Limited Vs. Wellworth Financial Services Private Limited, (2020) 08 NCLT CK 0052 NCLT allowed the petition filed by the petitioner for seeking sanction, of the tribunal under Sections 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013, to the Scheme of Amalgamation (Merger by Absorption) of the (Transferor Company) with the Transferee Company) and their respective shareholders ('Scheme'). While allowing the petition NCLT held that from the material on record, the Scheme appears to be fair and reasonable and does not violate any provisions of law and is not contrary to public policy or public interest. Since all the requisite statutory compliances have been fulfilled, C.P. (CAA)/939/MB/2020 have been made absolute in terms of prayer Clause 32(a) of the Petition mentioned therein. The Scheme of Amalgamation (Merger by Absorption) is sanctioned hereby, and the Appointed Date of the Scheme is 1st April, 2019. The Transferor Company is dissolved without wind...

Siripuram Developers Private Limited And Ors Vs. Andhra Bank (Now Merged With Union Bank Of India) And Ors., (2020) 08 NCLT CK 0031 NCLT allowed the application filed by the applicants under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, inter- alia to set aside the impugned possession notice dated 11.03.2020 and direct the Respondent No. 1 Bank to not take any coercive steps as against the Applicant companies till the closure of liquidation proceedings. While allowing the application NCLT held that though it is a settled position of Law that the liabilities of a surety is coextensive with that of principal debtor and further in view of the Law settled by the Hon'ble NCLAT and Hon'ble Supreme Court that a Financial Creditor can proceed to enforce the guarantees against the guarantors. Thus the settled position of Law, that there should not be any restraints on a Financial Creditor to proceed against the Guarantor even after the initiation of CIRP, approval of Res...