Debenture-based financial debt was upheld, default proved, and collateral objections failed to bar insolvency admission.

A debenture subscription arrangement was treated as financial debt because it created a creditor-debtor relationship with disbursal, repayment obligations, accrued interest, redemption premium and penal interest. Non-payment despite notices established default on the record. Objections based on privity of contract, alleged lack of board authority and stamp duty on the guarantee were rejected because the transaction authorised enforcement on default, the board resolution permitted institution of insolvency proceedings, and the stamp-duty challenge was inapplicable in the insolvency context. The section 7 application was found complete and admissible, leading to admission and commencement of CIRP with moratorium and appointment of an IRP.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the debenture subscription arrangement created a financial debt and whether the corporate debtor had committed default; (ii) whether objections based on privity of contract, authority under the board resolution, and stamp duty on the guarantee defeated maintainability of the section 7 application; (iii) whether the application satisfied the requirements for admission and commencement of corporate insolvency resolution process.

Issue (i): whether the debenture subscription arrangement created a financial debt and whether the corporate debtor had committed default.

Analysis: The amount subscribed under the debenture arrangement was held to constitute a creditor-debtor relationship. Debentures were treated as falling within the statutory concept of financial debt. The record showed disbursal of funds, contractual repayment obligations, accrued interest, redemption premium, and penal interest, together with non-payment despite notices and reminders. The claimed outstanding amount was found to be supported by the documents on record.

Conclusion: The arrangement constituted financial debt and default by the corporate debtor was established.

Issue (ii): whether objections based on privity of contract, authority under the board resolution, and stamp duty on the guarantee defeated maintainability of the section 7 application.

Analysis: The debtor's objections were rejected. The agreement expressly enabled the creditor to accelerate redemption and enforce security on default, so the absence of a separate privity argument did not bar the petition. The board resolution was read as authorising institution of an insolvency petition. On stamp duty, the guarantee was found to have been executed at New Delhi with adequate stamp duty paid, and the executing party was treated as liable under the Indian Stamp Act. The arbitration-based stamp-duty objection was held inapplicable to the insolvency context.

Conclusion: The objections to maintainability were not accepted and did not defeat the application.

Issue (iii): whether the application satisfied the requirements for admission and commencement of corporate insolvency resolution process.

Analysis: Since debt and default were held to be established and the amount in default exceeded the statutory threshold, the application was found to be complete and fit for admission. Consequential orders for moratorium, public announcement, and appointment of an interim resolution professional followed the statutory scheme.

Conclusion: The application was admissible and was admitted for commencement of corporate insolvency resolution process.

Final Conclusion: The petition under section 7 was allowed, insolvency resolution was initiated against the corporate debtor, moratorium operated under the Code, and an interim resolution professional was appointed.

Ratio Decidendi: A debenture-based repayment obligation can constitute financial debt under the insolvency code, and once debt and default are established on the record, the adjudicating authority must admit a complete section 7 application notwithstanding collateral objections that do not displace the enforceable repayment liability.

---