Tribunal Confirms Jurisdiction, Initiates CIRP for Financial Creditor

The Tribunal confirmed jurisdiction over the matter, classified the applicant as a "Financial Creditor," and recognized the oral loan agreement as valid. Ongoing legal proceedings did not hinder initiating the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The application met procedural requirements, leading to admission for CIRP initiation against the respondent corporate debtor. Mr. Sameer Rastogi was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional, a moratorium was declared, and the applicant was directed to deposit funds for expenses. Cooperation from the corporate debtor's management was mandated.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal.
2. Definition and classification of "Financial Creditor" and "Financial Debt".
3. Validity and enforceability of an oral loan agreement.
4. Pendency of other legal proceedings affecting the insolvency process.
5. Compliance with procedural requirements for initiating Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).

Detailed Analysis:

1. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal:
The Tribunal confirmed its jurisdiction over the matter as the registered office of the respondent corporate debtor is situated in New Delhi, falling under the territorial jurisdiction of the National Company Law Tribunal, New Delhi, in accordance with sub-section (1) of Section 60 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (the Code).

2. Definition and Classification of "Financial Creditor" and "Financial Debt":
The respondent contested that the applicant was not a "financial creditor" and the debt did not qualify as "financial debt" under the Code. The Tribunal examined Sections 5(7) and 5(8) of the Code, which define "Financial Creditor" and "Financial Debt". The Tribunal found that the loan disbursed by the applicant to the respondent was indeed a financial debt as it was disbursed against the consideration for time value of money, including both principal and interest. Hence, the applicant was recognized as a "Financial Creditor".

3. Validity and Enforceability of an Oral Loan Agreement:
The respondent argued that the loan was based on an oral agreement and was repayable within seven years, not on demand. The Tribunal noted that the disbursal of the loan was not disputed and that an oral agreement is legally enforceable. The Tribunal also referenced an email dated 30.09.2018 from the respondent acknowledging the debt and expressing intent to repay, which countered the claim that the loan was repayable after seven years.

4. Pendency of Other Legal Proceedings Affecting the Insolvency Process:
The respondent mentioned ongoing disputes before the National Company Law Tribunal, Jaipur, as a reason to contest the insolvency application. The Tribunal clarified that such disputes do not impede the initiation of CIRP under Section 7 of the Code. The Tribunal cited Section 238 of the Code, which gives it overriding effect over other laws, and referenced judgments from the Hon'ble NCLAT and Supreme Court supporting this position.

5. Compliance with Procedural Requirements for Initiating CIRP:
The Tribunal verified the application under Section 7 of the Code and found it complete, with all necessary documents and information provided, including the name of the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) and a declaration of no pending disciplinary proceedings against him. The Tribunal confirmed that the financial debt exceeded the threshold limit of Rupees one lakh and that default had occurred. Consequently, the application satisfied the requirements of sub-section 5(a) of Section 7 of the Code.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal admitted the application for initiating CIRP against the respondent corporate debtor. Mr. Sameer Rastogi was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional. A moratorium was declared under Section 14 of the Code, prohibiting certain actions against the corporate debtor. The Tribunal directed the applicant to deposit a sum of Rs. 2 Lakhs with the IRP for expenses and mandated cooperation from the corporate debtor's management. The order was to be communicated to relevant parties and the Registrar of Companies for updating the corporate debtor's status.

---